2 ms·
> And meanwhile, the Britain's just-elected new PM, with a massive majority in the new Parliament, started his legal career as a human rights lawyer. I don't t
by ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
> And meanwhile, the Britain's just-elected new PM, with a massive majority in the new Parliament, started his legal career as a human rights lawyer.
I don't think that Starmer can do much for this situation even if it was on his list of priorities. Even if he declared the island(s) to be free from UK occupation, then the U.S. would still be blocking non-military people from accessing it.
- bell-cot 2y agoI'd say that Starmer could do quite a bit...but unless he found a particularly clever solution, the political cost would be too high. Leaving the bottom line the same, either way.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y agoWhat kind of things could he do?
- bell-cot 2y agoSmall picture? Call the Oval Office, and let Joe know the problem's gotta be fixed. (Yes, there'd be a quid pro quo price to pay, even if word never got out. It ain't 1880 no more - when the Royal Navy ruled the oceans, but even 4th-rate nations could get away with laughing in the US Navy's face.) Slightly bigger picture? Move the migrants off Diego Garcia by fiat (they are de facto prisoners there) to some tiny British Island, and tell the British court to deal with them there. The latter would open a can of worms in British domestic politics. The right-ish wing would (at best) want the island to be a lifeless rock with a large glacier or smoking volcano on it - better to send an "emigrants & refugees NOT welcome" message. The left-ish wing would not react well to forced relocation to such a spot.