London seeks to amend Chagos deal after US opposition
Prime Minister Andy Burnham is seeking a new arrangement with Washington and Mauritius concerning the strategic Diego Garcia base.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham wants to reshape the agreement on the Chagos Archipelago after the United States opposed its current version. He says a new arrangement is needed to secure the future of the British-American base on Diego Garcia.
Burnham told The Economist in an interview that London is examining with American counterparts how the arrangement could be amended. He referred to an agreement on Greenland as a possible example, without presenting a detailed alternative. The prime minister acknowledged that finding a solution remained difficult.
The original agreement was concluded in 2025 by the previous British government. Under it, Mauritius would gain sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, while the United Kingdom and the United States would continue using the military base on Diego Garcia. The arrangement was to run for 99 years.
Under the agreement, Mauritius would receive £165 million during the first three years and £120 million annually thereafter. The payments were suspended after US President Donald Trump rejected the deal. British Defence Secretary Wes Streeting previously said that the agreement could not proceed in its current form without American support.
The impasse is not solely about military cooperation. The Chagos Archipelago was separated from Mauritius by the United Kingdom in 1965, shortly before Mauritius became independent. The islands' inhabitants were subsequently removed. In 2019, the International Court of Justice stated that Mauritius's decolonisation had not been completed in accordance with the right to self-determination and that British administration of the archipelago should end.
The British government subsequently signed the agreement with Mauritius, but the treaty has not yet entered into force. British implementing legislation is required, and the legal basis for the American use of Diego Garcia must also be amended. A bill fell at the end of the previous parliamentary session. A new British parliamentary briefing therefore describes ratification as paused.
For the Netherlands, the strategic significance is particularly relevant. Diego Garcia is located in the Indian Ocean and is a joint British-American military base. The discussion therefore touches on relations between the United States and its European allies, but also on how the interests of the Chagossians and Mauritius should be weighed against military continuity. For now, it is unclear whether Washington, London and Mauritius can accept the same new terms.
Also show the region and a close-up
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Andy Burnham said on 5 November that the United Kingdom was discussing an amended arrangement with the United States.
- The 2025 agreement would transfer sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius and allow the United Kingdom and the United States to use Diego Garcia.
- The agreement has not yet entered into force and British ratification has been paused.
- In 2019, the International Court of Justice stated that British administration of the archipelago should end.
Left
Arguments From a left-wing perspective, a new arrangement should place the rights and consent of the Chagossians at its centre rather than once again being designed primarily around American military interests. The transfer to Mauritius and a fair role for the displaced population matter more than keeping a base open without conditions.
Values Self-determination, decolonisation, human rights and redress for historical injustice.
Consequences A compromise that prioritises the military base could further undermine trust in British promises. Greater involvement for Chagossians could delay the negotiations, but might strengthen their legal and moral legitimacy.
Centre
Arguments A centrist political perspective seeks a legally sound agreement that recognises Mauritian sovereignty, keeps the military base operational and wins the agreement of all the governments involved. None of the parties can resolve the issue alone.
Values Legal certainty, alliance cooperation, administrative feasibility and protection of the islanders' interests.
Consequences An amended deal could break the deadlock, but would probably require financial, legal and military concessions. As long as Washington does not agree, the existing agreement will remain practically blocked.
Right
Arguments This perspective emphasises that a strategic military base should not be made dependent on a transfer that does not have the backing of American security policy. The United Kingdom must secure control and military access and prevent rival powers from gaining influence in the Indian Ocean.
Values National sovereignty, deterrence, military reliability and protection of allied interests.
Consequences A firmer British position could protect military continuity, but might conflict with international law, Mauritius and the claims of the Chagossians. Delaying or rejecting the transfer could increase diplomatic tensions.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article's core is based on a report from 5 November 2026 and two recent British parliamentary briefings. The precise content of a possible new agreement is presented as uncertain because no proposal has yet been published.
- confirmed Andy Burnham wants to reshape the Chagos agreement following American opposition. — The Guardian reported this on 5 November 2026, based on Burnham's interview. source
- confirmed The original agreement provides for Mauritian sovereignty and a British and American base on Diego Garcia with a term of 99 years. — The Guardian describes the agreement; the House of Commons Library confirms its main features. source
- confirmed The agreement provides for £165 million for the first three years and £120 million per year thereafter. — These amounts appear in The Guardian's report. source
- confirmed Payments to Mauritius have been suspended and ratification has been paused. — The Guardian reports the suspension; the House of Commons Library describes the paused ratification. source
- confirmed In 2019, the International Court of Justice stated that the separation of the archipelago was inconsistent with self-determination. — The House of Commons Library summarises the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion. source
- confirmed British implementing legislation fell at the end of the previous parliamentary session. — This is stated in the briefings by the House of Lords Library and the House of Commons Library. source
Editor's note
It is certain that Burnham spoke on 5 November about an amended arrangement and that the existing agreement is stalled because of American opposition. The precise terms of a new deal remain unknown; the background on the legal and historical context comes from British parliamentary briefings.Sources
- Burnham wants to ‘recast’ Chagos Islands deal after US resistance — The Guardian
- International Law and the Chagos Archipelago — House of Commons Library
- British Sovereignty Protection (Chagos Islands) Bill [HL] — House of Lords Library
More on this in Dutch media
- NRC — „chagosarchipel diego garcia”
- NU.nl — „chagosarchipel diego garcia”
- De Telegraaf — „chagosarchipel diego garcia”