Mauritius Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth has ordered a review of a UK agreement that secures a 99-year lease for a military base on the Chagos Islands. The deal, announced earlier this year, has been criticized by Mauritius and the US due to concerns over national security.
Background on the Agreement
The deal was announced earlier this year, securing the UK-US military base on Diego Garcia. Under the terms of the agreement, the UK-US military presence is expected to run for 99 years with an option to renew, with Britain paying a regular annual sum of money.
Criticism from Mauritius and the US
Mr. Ramgoolam, who was a critic of the deal before taking office, expressed continued reservations after meeting with the UK’s national security adviser Jonathan Powell on Monday. The president-elect’s pick for secretary of state, Marco Rubio, also warned in October that the agreement posed “a serious threat” to US national security by handing over the islands to a country allied with China.
Criticism from the Incoming Trump Administration
Marco Rubio, the president-elect’s pick for secretary of state, warned in October that the agreement posed a serious threat to US national security. However, officials are understood to be confident that the agreement is in both sides’ interests.
Response from the UK
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman stated that they are engaging with the new Mauritian government and look forward to progressing the deal. Sir Keir Starmer defended the deal as a “good deal,” securing the base in the vital interests of the US and the UK.
Key Points:
-
The deal involves the cession of sovereignty over the Chagos Islands to the Mauritian government.
-
Under the terms of the deal, the UK-US military presence on Diego Garcia is expected to run for 99 years with an option to renew.
-
Britain will pay a regular annual sum of money as part of the agreement.
-
Mr. Ramgoolam expressed continued reservations about the deal after meeting with the UK’s national security adviser.
-
The incoming Trump administration in the US has criticized the agreement, citing concerns over US national security.