Starmer pulls Chagos bill after Trump backlash

Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to pull his Chagos Islands bill in the wake of a US backlash over the deal.

The legislation was expected to be debated in the House of Lords on Monday, but was delayed on Friday night after the Conservatives warned it could violate a 60-year-old treaty with the US that enshrines British sovereignty over the archipelago.

Donald Trump turned against the Chagos deal earlier this week, saying that Britain’s plan to hand the Indian Ocean territory to Mauritius was “an act of great stupidity”.

Under the terms of Sir Keir’s deal, the UK would hand over the archipelago to Mauritius and lease back the Diego Garcia military base, a facility built there in the 1970s that has been used by UK and US forces.

The Tories had warned this agreement would break a 1966 treaty between the UK and the US, that asserts Britain’s sovereignty over the islands and is meant to ensure they remain available to both sides for defence purposes.

Ministers said in late December that the two nations were engaging in talks about updating this treaty in light of the new Chagos deal, but the talks have not been completed.

Asked last night if Mr Trump would be willing to tear up the 1966 treaty and allow the transfer of Chagos to go ahead, the US state department referred back to the president’s criticism on Tuesday when he said: “The UK giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY.”

Foreign Office insiders were scrambling to understand the significance of the treaty on Friday night.

One source played down its relevance, saying while conversations with US administration figures about the issue were ongoing, the Americans were broadly supportive.

The legal significance of the old treaty and whether the new legislation would effectively override it was also unclear.

Much depends on whether Mr Trump’s position on the Chagos deal has genuinely changed or – as Sir Keir has claimed – that this was only being used to force a change in Britain’s Greenland stance.

If Downing Street tried to press ahead without Washington’s approval, it could face a bruising battle with the US state department.

A government spokesman insisted that the claims the Chagos deal broke international law were “complete nonsense”.

Relations between Sir Keir and President Trump have soured dramatically this week.

On Monday, the Prime Minister held an emergency press conference to criticise Mr Trump’s attempts to take control of Greenland, saying that “alliances endure because they are built on respect, and partnership, not pressure”.

He later added that he would not “yield” to Mr Trump over the issue.

On Friday a new row erupted between the two men, when Mr Trump claimed that America’s Nato allies had “stayed a little back off the front lines” when serving in Afghanistan.

Sir Keir said the president should apologise for the “insulting and frankly appalling” remarks, paying tribute to the 457 British troops who died and those who were injured in the conflict.

Mr Trump’s comments were also condemned by Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, as well as Prince Harry, who himself fought in the conflict.

On Friday morning the Conservatives tabled a motion in the House of Lords calling for the new Chagos deal’s ratification to be delayed to allow talks on the 1966 treaty to conclude, with the aim of avoiding a breach of international law.

Legislation underpinning the agreement was expected to return to the Lords on Monday for further scrutiny.

But The Telegraph can reveal that it will no longer be returning to the upper chamber as planned.

Ms Badenoch said the deal could “not progress while this issue remains unsolved”.

She said: “Throughout the Chagos debates, Keir Starmer has tried to hide behind the cover of international law, now the Conservatives are exposing that his shameful surrender may be illegal.”

The Telegraph understands that Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, and Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, discussed the Chagos Islands deal at a dinner at Davos.

Mrs Badenoch had also raised concerns with US representatives. She met Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, on Monday night during his visit to Parliament and discussed the issue.

Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said: “He is happy to hand over British sovereign territory and £35bn of taxpayers’ money to an ally of China – even if it conflicts with international law.

“As a lawyer he should know better. But his desire to appease Beijing clouds his judgment, as we saw with his decision to approve the Chinese spy hub super embassy this week.”

The Government has repeatedly insisted that an agreement with Mauritius is needed for security reasons and would avoid a costly legal battle over the territory.

Sir Keir has pointed to a 2019 ruling in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which was non-binding, stating Britain should relinquish sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius.

The agreement struck in December 1966 between the UK and the US said the Chagos Islands “shall remain under United Kingdom sovereignty”.

The treaty, registered with the United Nations a year after the archipelago became British Indian Ocean Territory, was agreed as part of discussions around the use of Diego Garcia by the UK and US for defence purposes.

Asked about the effect of the previous deal on Sir Keir’s new agreement, Baroness Chapman, the Foreign Office minister, said the UK and US were discussing the matter.

She said in December: “The agreement between the UK and Mauritius secures the important UK-US military base on Diego Garcia.

“The agreement was tested at the highest levels of the United States’ security establishment, across multiple agencies, and it has been backed by our key allies and international partners, including the US and all our Five Eyes partners.

“Talks are ongoing to update the UK-US Exchange of Letters on the operation of the Diego Garcia Base.”

Lord Callanan, the shadow Foreign Office spokesman in the House of Lords, wrote to Lady Chapman on Friday asking whether the Chagos deal would be legal if the 1966 treaty remained unchanged.

A government spokesman said: “This is complete nonsense. The deal fully complies with international law.

“The Government remains fully committed to the deal to secure the joint UK-US base on Diego Garcia, which is vital for our national security.

“This is irresponsible and reckless behaviour by peers, whose roles is to check legislation, not interfere with our national security priorities.”

[Source: Daily Telegraph]