I feel really bad for Chagossians people; I didn't know about their struggle. Deporting 1,500 individuals is simply crazy, who decided that simply didn't consider Chagossians to be humans. I hope the UK/US Army will leave for good.
I live on an island in Canada an I can say people who live on islands feel close to each other. It's like a small town but at another level again since you are isolated from others.
It would be terrible to have families moved they eventually lose contact with their neighbours in a city like Crawley. The environment for the people born in a tropical island compared to cold urban Crawley would have been depressing.
Britain argued that it should be resolved bilaterally. America took its side. But with its State Department understaffed and its president widely distrusted, its lobbying effort failed. Britain’s diplomacy was no better; the name of Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, “raised an eyebrow or a laugh each time it was mentioned”, according to one person present. In an inauspicious sign for “Empire 2.0”, the nickname British officials use for their plan to forge closer links with the Commonwealth, the vast majority of Britain’s former colonies backed Mauritius or abstained.
The money quote. Some chickens seems to be circling near the roost.
I had buddies who spent time in Diego Garcia, before I knew how it came to be a US base. I think it's horrible how it was aquired and we should immediately make moves towards reperations and departure, or at least agreement to payments for lease. I'm tired of my country increasingly acting like an empire of force when that goes against everything I was taught we should stand for. More than that though, is the inability to admit wrongdoing and learn from past mistakes, at least in public.
Recently the state department has been undergoing some upheaval due to the tumultous new POTUS. One was complaining to me about it and my response was they they should have gotten rid of the war-criminal Kissinger/Zbrenzski group a long time ago and they might have avoided some of this blowback. Too many DoS people essentially worship Kissinger as the inventor of American diplomacy. Hogwash I say. It's time for real leadership in the executive to take control of the state department and other agencies and reduce what I call Machiavellian realpolitik run amok.
Here is Kissingers comment on Diego Garcia. “There are only 90,000 people out there. Who gives a damn?”
> I'm tired of my country increasingly acting like an empire of force when that goes against everything I was taught we should stand for.
What surprises me everytime I interact with Americans is their naivety in their assumption that the leaders / politicians are any different or even better than those from any other country. Their belief that somehow these people who fight tremendous odds (almost certainly not ethically) to get to where they are, managed to do this while being true to any kind of moral compass.
For that sort of thing to be true would necessitate that Americans be essentially different than other humans.
IOW, I am surprised that Americans do not realise that the only difference between POTUS and Kim Jong Un or Saddam or... Is what they can reasonably get away with doing.
> IOW, I am surprised that Americans do not realise that the only difference between POTUS and Kim Jong Un or Saddam or... Is what they can reasonably get away with doing.
Fyi, I imagine you're getting down voted because, to my knowledge, the current US government doesn't have labor camps or gas minorities.
A better soapbox might have been "histoically, the US is as guilty as anyone of exterminating indiginous peoples."
So it's an issue of the sovereignty of the islands then? The argument I'm hearing is that due to the UK leaning in favour of sovereignty, that it can no longer continue to, by default, control the islands? So allow the islands to hold a vote.
This seems like it was a vote held by other countries on whether or not they supported these islands not being allowed sovereignty even if they wanted it.
All inhabitants have been forcefully evicted. There is nobody who could vote there. It's administered from an office in London. The UK has rented the biggest island to the US army. Once a year officials from UK and the US military gather to discuss issues about the base, and they meet in London to do so.
Under these circumstances it's clear why the legal fight is fought by far away.
The UN's one big jab is to prevent nuclear war by limiting border disputes. I'm not sure what the value of them weighing in on this case. What happens if/when the ICJ issues its non-binding ruling that the Islands needs to change hands? If the UK doesn't leave, does it become an illegal occupation?
I think it diminishes the UN's authority to have it issue edicts that are not going to be implemented or enforced.
> I think it diminishes the UN's authority to have it issue edicts that are not going to be implemented or enforced.
The UN does have enforcement (by the way of international military missions), unfortunately as long as either the US or the Russians/China have veto powers this enforcement will only be used against African or former-Yugoslavian countries.
I saw a documentary on how Britain deported the island's natives. It was pretty sick. They killed all their dogs, then told them, get on this boat or you're next.
After many years, what was left of the islanders won a court case against Britain who then turned around and said, good luck trying to get to your island in one piece. They continue to rent the island to the US.
Diego Garcia is a very strategic place. If the US/UK were to leave, who would take it over? Most likely the Chinese would move in. There's no really good answer there.
The EU taking the stance that they are taking is really kind of counterproductive. They know nothing is going to come of it and they waste an opportunity for reproachment with the UK. They also just make the brexit case even stronger, confirming what many say about the euros not really having the best interests of the UK (or even themselves) in mind in many instances.
Europe and the EU are getting conflated more and more. It's kind of like how if someone said he's American, you wouldn't assume he's from Brazil, even though technically Brazilians are American since they're from the American continent or continents.
In a political conversation the geographic meaning of Europe is usually significantly less useful than the political one. So this is not surprising at all.
Whilst he's wrong from a geographical perspective, I assumed in good faith that he was talking about 'Europe', the political institution - which he'd still be wrong about. The UK is still part of the EU until it isn't.
Western Germany is a very strategic place. If the allies were to leave, who would take it over? Most likely the Soviets would move in. There's no really good answer there.
Your statement is similarly silly. The issue in question is whether the islanders can return & have the right to self-determination.
There's no reason the US & UK couldn't work out some deal with them to continue having a military presence on the islands, the US has bases in plenty of sovereign countries, e.g. Germany.
> The issue in question is whether the islanders can return & have the right to self-determination.
Your comment is either extremely naive or terribly disingenuous. Even in the XXI century we see nations invested in annexation campaigns motivated by their need to reach military and strategic objectives. There are even nations that are deeply invested in creating artificial islands much like Diego Garcia to achieve goals that are achieved by Diego Garcia. Why can anyone talk about self determination if nothing stops an occupier from simply dropping anchor and taking over the place?
Firstly nobody's seriously talking about independence of the BIOT yet, simply for the islanders having a right to return. The US also has an important military base in Guam, but somehow over 100k people manage to live there.
There's plenty of land left on the island where these people can live, they're not demanding independence or that the military base have to leave.
My comment was made in the context that even if the BIOT were to become independent, this doesn't sound like a big deal for the military base. It's very likely that if that were to happen the US could simply offer them the same deal that the independent Marshall Islands and two other island republics have:
Brexit has happened. May has triggered Article 50.
It doesn't matter whether the case is stronger or not. Britain has decided to take its toys and go home.
The worst part about the entire Brexit fiasco is that the British politicians simply don't seem to understand what the situation is. They seem to think they are the only actors in this entire process. So when the rubber actually hits the road, they are forced to capitulate like they had to on the 1st day on sequencing.
> [...] confirming what many say about the euros not really having the best interests of the UK (or even themselves) in mind in many instances.
How can this be confirmation if it occurred after Britain triggered Brexit? It's a reaction. Of course "the euros", as you call them, don't have Britain's best interests in mind considering Britain is leaving.
Most likely Mauritius would lease Diego Garcia to the US, just like the UK did, hopefully while negotiating a much better deal for the Chagossians.
It is not at all clear to me what lies behind Britains reluctance to concede here. They know very well they did wrong – violating their own rules – lopping off the territory in the first place.
What if there really isn't any conspiracy behind the EU stance here, what if they simply vote what they believe is right?
Brits just want to swagger about and feel honourable. Look at how they dealt with the return of Hong Kong to China. Pomp, ceremony, wonderful! This grubby little problem just goes against that pride. So we just ignore it.
To be fair, Hong Kong isn't very happy about no longer being British now. (Different example than current, as there are a huge number of native civilians living there)
> It is not at all clear to me what lies behind Britains reluctance to concede here.
Money and liability. If britain concedes, they might be held liable and be forced to pay for their misdeeds.
> They know very well they did wrong
What makes you think britain cares about their misdeeds? They've done so much worse than in diego garcia, but they still parade around like they did the world a favor.
> violating their own rules
Since when did britain care about rules? R
At the end of the day, it's about money and power.
We accept this kind of behaviour in our own nation, but then act like the EU are somehow 'impure' for acting in kind. The UK are playing a diplomatic game and so are the EU. Sometimes people disagree on what is best for the EU, or UK. That is hardly a substantive argument in favour of Brexit.
Sounds like someone might get benefit out of the Leave voters, IMO misdirected, notion of sovereignty.
They can hardly argue (consistently) it's wrong for small island to get full self-determination when this was one of the major positives being floated for Brexit.
I would think many more would know Diego Garcia exists (both among British voters and world-wide). Most of them probably would also know it's an island somewhere far away from main land masses. In that sense, they would know the Chagos Archipelago exists, even they don't know its name, or that it is an archipelago.
There is no US/UK power monopoly. The rest of the world is resurgent and willing not to be brow-beaten into line.
I find it hard to believe that the British government have allies. As for British people, sure, friends all over the world, but the British government? I am scratching my head. Apart from the U.S. maybe it is just the Falkland Islands and maybe Gibraltar that are genuine 'allies'.
Even the relationship with the U.S. government is a bit strange - the 'special relationship' is something the likes of Tony Blair bark on about but the U.S. government don't use the term so readily, regardless of the intellect of the POTUS.
The deal with the E.U. was never on equal terms, e.g. adoption of the Euro or free movement of people, the U.K. was just one of those relatives with special needs that the E.U. had to put up with.
Even the Commonwealth is something you never really hear about these days. I doubt the average British citizen/subject can name five members of the Commonwealth correctly. Sure the leaders of Commonwealth countries might curtsy for the Queen but there is no guaranteed backing for what Britain does from any Commonwealth country.
The NATO alliance is just a collection of vassal states corrupted and bullied by the U.S. into some 'alliance'. There is no bond between Turkey and the U.K., these 'allies' are just 'allies' because the U.S. wants to have its weapons in Turkey as well as in the U.K. Same applies for the other NATO countries, there is no special love for Blighty just because our soldiers dress up in silly uniforms and play wargames together.
Essentially the US/UK governments have lost the respect of the rest of the world, even if there are loyal stooges in place, e.g. those in-bred oiks that claim to be royal family in Saudi Arabia. This lack of respect results in a lack of fear and growing of backbone, hence decisions such as this.
> has become indispensable for America’s armed forces, who nickname it “the footprint of freedom”
Footprint of freedom? Come on. Why do we have to do that? As a naive little kid, maybe it would make me proud. As a rational adult, it's so cringeworthy and childish and pathetic. Especially when you learn that the island/atoll was basically stolen from the people and the people were forcibly expelled by the british just so that we can play world police.
You know when the word "freedom" is used by Americans, especially American government, it can only refer to oppression, slavery, and war. Basically, the exact opposite. I wouldn't mind all of our crimes against humanity quite as much if we were just honest with ourselves and everyone else about what they are. But it has to be like this because most adults here are dumber than the naive little kid you describe. They don't realize the irony and are actually proud of such things. The mindset you grew out of as a little child is their adult mindset.
50 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 107 ms ] threadIt would be terrible to have families moved they eventually lose contact with their neighbours in a city like Crawley. The environment for the people born in a tropical island compared to cold urban Crawley would have been depressing.
The Chagossians were deported by the UK, so technically some islanders deported other islanders.
Of course, we also know that there is still a long way to go before the conclusion.
The money quote. Some chickens seems to be circling near the roost.
Recently the state department has been undergoing some upheaval due to the tumultous new POTUS. One was complaining to me about it and my response was they they should have gotten rid of the war-criminal Kissinger/Zbrenzski group a long time ago and they might have avoided some of this blowback. Too many DoS people essentially worship Kissinger as the inventor of American diplomacy. Hogwash I say. It's time for real leadership in the executive to take control of the state department and other agencies and reduce what I call Machiavellian realpolitik run amok.
Here is Kissingers comment on Diego Garcia. “There are only 90,000 people out there. Who gives a damn?”
"Increasingly"?
We're doing pretty well as opposed to historical standards. Hell, we created Panama as a nation for strategic military reasons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseas_interventions_of_th...
What surprises me everytime I interact with Americans is their naivety in their assumption that the leaders / politicians are any different or even better than those from any other country. Their belief that somehow these people who fight tremendous odds (almost certainly not ethically) to get to where they are, managed to do this while being true to any kind of moral compass.
For that sort of thing to be true would necessitate that Americans be essentially different than other humans.
IOW, I am surprised that Americans do not realise that the only difference between POTUS and Kim Jong Un or Saddam or... Is what they can reasonably get away with doing.
Fyi, I imagine you're getting down voted because, to my knowledge, the current US government doesn't have labor camps or gas minorities.
A better soapbox might have been "histoically, the US is as guilty as anyone of exterminating indiginous peoples."
This seems like it was a vote held by other countries on whether or not they supported these islands not being allowed sovereignty even if they wanted it.
Under these circumstances it's clear why the legal fight is fought by far away.
I think it diminishes the UN's authority to have it issue edicts that are not going to be implemented or enforced.
The UN does have enforcement (by the way of international military missions), unfortunately as long as either the US or the Russians/China have veto powers this enforcement will only be used against African or former-Yugoslavian countries.
It was always an illegal occupation.
> I think it diminishes the UN's authority to have it issue edicts that are not going to be implemented or enforced.
If not the UN, then who? How are these people suppose to get their stolen land back?
After many years, what was left of the islanders won a court case against Britain who then turned around and said, good luck trying to get to your island in one piece. They continue to rent the island to the US.
Edit: They went to Mauritius and the Seychelles, apparently https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Garcia
The EU taking the stance that they are taking is really kind of counterproductive. They know nothing is going to come of it and they waste an opportunity for reproachment with the UK. They also just make the brexit case even stronger, confirming what many say about the euros not really having the best interests of the UK (or even themselves) in mind in many instances.
This is news to the rest of the world.
France, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, etc all have stolen territory all over the world.
Your statement is similarly silly. The issue in question is whether the islanders can return & have the right to self-determination.
There's no reason the US & UK couldn't work out some deal with them to continue having a military presence on the islands, the US has bases in plenty of sovereign countries, e.g. Germany.
Your comment is either extremely naive or terribly disingenuous. Even in the XXI century we see nations invested in annexation campaigns motivated by their need to reach military and strategic objectives. There are even nations that are deeply invested in creating artificial islands much like Diego Garcia to achieve goals that are achieved by Diego Garcia. Why can anyone talk about self determination if nothing stops an occupier from simply dropping anchor and taking over the place?
There's plenty of land left on the island where these people can live, they're not demanding independence or that the military base have to leave.
My comment was made in the context that even if the BIOT were to become independent, this doesn't sound like a big deal for the military base. It's very likely that if that were to happen the US could simply offer them the same deal that the independent Marshall Islands and two other island republics have:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_of_Free_Association#Mi...
Brexit has happened. May has triggered Article 50.
It doesn't matter whether the case is stronger or not. Britain has decided to take its toys and go home.
The worst part about the entire Brexit fiasco is that the British politicians simply don't seem to understand what the situation is. They seem to think they are the only actors in this entire process. So when the rubber actually hits the road, they are forced to capitulate like they had to on the 1st day on sequencing.
How can this be confirmation if it occurred after Britain triggered Brexit? It's a reaction. Of course "the euros", as you call them, don't have Britain's best interests in mind considering Britain is leaving.
It is not at all clear to me what lies behind Britains reluctance to concede here. They know very well they did wrong – violating their own rules – lopping off the territory in the first place. What if there really isn't any conspiracy behind the EU stance here, what if they simply vote what they believe is right?
Money and liability. If britain concedes, they might be held liable and be forced to pay for their misdeeds.
> They know very well they did wrong
What makes you think britain cares about their misdeeds? They've done so much worse than in diego garcia, but they still parade around like they did the world a favor.
> violating their own rules
Since when did britain care about rules? R
At the end of the day, it's about money and power.
The rightful owners?
> Most likely the Chinese would move in.
Why would they? How would they?
> There's no really good answer there.
Other than giving it back to the people it was stolen from?
They can hardly argue (consistently) it's wrong for small island to get full self-determination when this was one of the major positives being floated for Brexit.
I find it hard to believe that the British government have allies. As for British people, sure, friends all over the world, but the British government? I am scratching my head. Apart from the U.S. maybe it is just the Falkland Islands and maybe Gibraltar that are genuine 'allies'.
Even the relationship with the U.S. government is a bit strange - the 'special relationship' is something the likes of Tony Blair bark on about but the U.S. government don't use the term so readily, regardless of the intellect of the POTUS.
The deal with the E.U. was never on equal terms, e.g. adoption of the Euro or free movement of people, the U.K. was just one of those relatives with special needs that the E.U. had to put up with.
Even the Commonwealth is something you never really hear about these days. I doubt the average British citizen/subject can name five members of the Commonwealth correctly. Sure the leaders of Commonwealth countries might curtsy for the Queen but there is no guaranteed backing for what Britain does from any Commonwealth country.
The NATO alliance is just a collection of vassal states corrupted and bullied by the U.S. into some 'alliance'. There is no bond between Turkey and the U.K., these 'allies' are just 'allies' because the U.S. wants to have its weapons in Turkey as well as in the U.K. Same applies for the other NATO countries, there is no special love for Blighty just because our soldiers dress up in silly uniforms and play wargames together.
Essentially the US/UK governments have lost the respect of the rest of the world, even if there are loyal stooges in place, e.g. those in-bred oiks that claim to be royal family in Saudi Arabia. This lack of respect results in a lack of fear and growing of backbone, hence decisions such as this.
Footprint of freedom? Come on. Why do we have to do that? As a naive little kid, maybe it would make me proud. As a rational adult, it's so cringeworthy and childish and pathetic. Especially when you learn that the island/atoll was basically stolen from the people and the people were forcibly expelled by the british just so that we can play world police.