Depopulation of Diego Garcia

It used to be true that the sun never set on the British flag, but now that America has seventy-six overseas military bases *, the saying can be said to apply to the American flag as well. One good example is the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. The Brits bought it from Mauritius in 1965, and over the next six years forcibly removed the Chagossian natives, all 2,000 of them, to Mauritius. Many Chagossians made routine trips to Mauritius for shopping and then were told the island of Diego Garcia was 'closed' to their return.

The Americans were in the market for another base. According to Wikipedia,

The United States government initially asked for the Aldabra Atoll, which had no human inhabitants. However, it was found to be home to the rare Aldabra tortoise. There are around 100,000 of these creatures on the islands which, due to their isolation, form a natural 'niche'. The wildlife lobby ensured that the US plans for Aldabra were dropped.
​

So the British conveniently leased (that is, sold out) the island of Diego Garcia to the Americans in 1971 so that they could have another base from which to run their growing military empire in south Asia. The original occupants were not consulted.

Claims by the islanders, who are legally citizens of British Indian Ocean Territory, have been fought back and forth in British courts in the last ten years, but at this time (January 2010) the islanders have not been allowed to return.

Island of Diego Garcia. Indian Ocean, 7 deg S, 24 deg E
​

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Garcia_depopulation_conspiracy,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Garcia

* I'm working on where David Vine came up with a 1,000 base figure, which I heard during a CBC interview. He hasn't responded to an e-mail asking about this. The following source shows 76 bases.
http://benefits.military.com/misc/installations/Browse_Service.jsp

 

Certainly not our proudest moment......

Though you say Chagossian natives when they aren't actually natives. Most of them are African slaves which the French dumped on the island in the 1700's (Not that that make it any better....)


However, they have won compenstation (although it has been small at a measley £3,000 each) and many have been allowed to settle in the UK, although some are still fighting for the right too (I don't understand why they don't already have the right as they are British citizens)

Hopefully some kind of justice will be enacted in the future. A resettlement plan is already underway

 

What you say is true. How many ancestors of today's white North Americans were in North America in 1800?

Also researcher David Vine, in a radio story on this issue (CBC), stated that displaced Chagossians in Mauritius weren't welcomed by the locals and tended to be destitute. The primary skill they had to offer was coconut farming, and they couldn't find work and weren't assimilated.

In the meantime, the U.S. has made a major base out of Diego Garcia from which they can pursue their imperialistic goals. B-52 drivers like the long runway. It's a real tropical paradise for the bomber boys.

My second Wikipedia source cited states that

The British Government had allocated £650,000 'in full and final settlement of HMG's obligations' towards its dispossessed citizens - slightly less than £3000 per head. This money went to the Mauritian Government to defray the costs of resettling the Chagossians.
​

If that is the same £3000 per head you mention, it didn't go to the people themselves, but to the government of Mauritius -- a far different outcome.

 

My mistake. I thought at least the £3,000 went to the Chagossians themselves.

Out of interest, has America taken any responsibility on the issue? I know Britain (Who was the prime instigator of resettlement) still refuses to, hence the running legal battle.

 

Not that I'm aware of. A Washington Post article cited in one of the Wikipedia sources states that

One American relief organization attempted in 1972 to raise the issue of United States “co-responsibility” for the fate of the Diego Garcians, but the State Department replied that their problems are strictly the concern of Britain and Mauritius, and not in any way those of the United States.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/bancoult-d16d.html#102
​

The legal battle in Britain seems to show the High Court ruling in favor of the islanders and the House of Lords overruling them. Apparently, black plantation workers are not well represented in the House of Lords.

There were U.S. House Foreign Relations hearings on the subject in 1976, but nothing came of them in the way of support for islanders.

Lawyer Olivier Bancourt sued various U.S. government officials (including McNamara and Rumsfeld) in 2002 on behalf of the Chagos Islanders, but the U.S. District Court in 2004 upheld the defendants' motion to dismiss on the grounds the court lacked jurisdiction. See
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/bancoult-2004-12-21.html#order
The court was also not inclined to issue a ruling that would embarrass Congress or the State Department:

Congress decided to provide funding for the construction of a military base on Diego Garcia.
As a result, it is impossible for the court to resolve this case without condemning the Executive for mistreating the Chagossians while they were being relocated to Mauritius and Seychelles.
At the same time, the court cannot entertain the plaintiffs’ claims without condemning Congress for financing the construction of a base on Diego Garcia and failing to demand that the Executive ensure that Britain provide adequate compensation for the resettlement of its citizens.
Accordingly, this case presents a nonjusticiable political question because it is impossible for the court to undertake an “independent resolution without expressing a lack of respect due coordinate branches of government.” Baker, 369 U.S.
​

In other words, forget the theory of checks and balances between judiciary and executive government in the U.S. This particular little judge doesn't rock the boat.

 

Hi everyone, I volunteer with the UK Chagos Support Association. I just thought I'd draw your attention to the work of UKCSA and a few things that are currently happening regarding the Chagos islands.

First of all, the Chagossians' legal battle against the UK Government will go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg this year. It's highly likely that the ECtHR will find against the UK Government - that is, find it to be in breach of its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights - which could very well prompt the UK to have to let the Chagossians return.

Secondly, the UK Government is currently consulting on whether or not to establish a marine protected area (MPA) around the Chagos archipelago, the aim being to protect the coral reefs there and the abundance of (rare) wildlife. This consultation is in response to a campaign by the Chagos Environment Network (a coalition of environmentalist/conservationist groups), who wish to see a full no-take fishing ban in the waters around the islands.

The CEN's campaign is bad news for the Chagossians and their campaign to return home! The Chagossians wish to establish a limited resettlement on one or more of the Outer Chagos islands, and a ban on them being able to fish their own waters would be disastrous. Therefore, it's really, REALLY important that the Chagossians' interests are not overlooked - either by politicians or the general public.

There are details on how to respond to the FCO consultation on the UK Chagos Support Association blog. You can also follow us on Twitter (@ChagosUK). We have a new website launching later this month, so keep your eyes peeled for that too.

The most important thing to remember is that the Chagossian issue is not dead and buried. On the contrary, it is a very live and current issue. There are people in civil society, the media and Parliament working very hard to secure justice for the Chagossians - we would be grateful for any additional support from the people on these forums!

Peter

 

Given that Diego Garcia has only 12 square miles of land (excluding reefs) and that the Americans have built this huge military base on it, I would think that coconut farming, one of the mainstays of the islanders, would be difficult to re-establish. Of course islander fishing rights are critically important also.
The U.S. could at least try to remedy the injustices here by hiring the islanders for labour on the base, and providing job training and housing for islanders if they are allowed to return.