Article Trump rips UK over Chagos Islands deal: says it shows weakness (DIY transaction)

[Syne]

Donald Trump's latest comments - calling the UK's plans to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius "an act of great stupidity" - mark a major change in position [by Trump].

When Keir Starmer announced the UK had signed the deal on 22 May 2025, Starmer said: "President Trump has welcomed the deal along with other allies, because they see the strategic importance of this base and that we cannot cede the ground to others who would seek to do us harm."
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also welcomed it, and issued a statement saying that Trump had "expressed his support for this monumental achievement".
Rubio said the deal "reflects the enduring strength of the US-UK relationship".

Seems to be conflating two different things there. The Trump admin likes that the UK is bearing the cost to keep the military base, but they only have to pay because they are giving the land to Mauritius.

[Yazata]

Good news for Britain, the United States and the whole world!

The Telegraph is reporting that Prime Minister Starmer has pulled the bill to hand over BIOT to Mauritius after it met strong opposition from President Trump.

It was scheduled to be debated today in the House of Lords where it faced significant opposition. Now it's reportedly off the table.

[Image: G_XvqmaXkAAHph-?format=jpg&name=medium]

Just watch: the establishment media will try to portray this as a sign of Starmer's and Britain's weakness in the face of Trump's bullying. Despite the fact that it pushes Britain to retain a presence in the Indian Ocean, which by any rational standard makes Britain stronger.

[Syne]

Apparently the UK made a treaty with the US to use that military base, until 2036. And we give them $14 million off of a missile system we sold them, to secure that deal.

[C C]

[...] Just watch: the establishment media will try to portray this as a sign of Starmer's and Britain's weakness in the face of Trump's bullying. Despite the fact that it pushes Britain to retain a presence in the Indian Ocean, which by any rational standard makes Britain stronger.

I'm still astonished that Starmer could be affected by Trump's opinion to such a degree, no matter how that influence is classified. But OTOH, it gives the UK an excuse for going against "international justice", which it didn't have before. The whole reason for surrendering to begin with seemed to be the Western guilt complex and the UK desiring to maintain a sainthood or politically correct status. Now it can redirect the condemning finger pointed at it to Trump. Who knows, maybe Starmer even called Trump up and privately asked him: "Hey, can you help us get out of this ___ with some theatrics, so that we can respectably keep ownership and sovereignty?"

[Yazata]

Here's the text of the US-UK treaty of 1966

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/...nglish.pdf

The very first provision is

(1) The territory shall remain under United Kingdom sovereignty [page 2]

But there's

(11) The United States Government and the United Kingdom Government contemplate that the islands shall remain available to meet the possible defense needs of the two governments for an indefinitely long period. Accordingly, after an initial period of 50 years this agreement shall remain in force for an additional period of twenty years unless, not more than two years before the end of the initial period, either government shall have given notice of termination to the other, in which case this agreement shall terminate two years from the date of such notice. [page 4]

---

The whole reason for surrendering to begin with seemed to be the Western guilt complex and the UK desiring to maintain a sainthood or politically correct status.

GB News presenter Alex Armstrong says

"The Chagos surrender deal is MUCH worse than thought:

1. It states we must: Recognise “the wrongs of the past” and “complete the process of decolonisation”

2. We give Mauritius, a ALLY of CHINA advance warning of any military action out of the base.

They have lost their minds."

Nigel Farage says:

"Why on earth should it take a social media post from the American president to force the UK government to act in our national interests?"