3 ms·
> So nothing really changes lol A crime against humanity begins to get fixed. Chagosians will finally be allowed to go back to their homes. Mauritius will get
by sofixa 2y ago
> So nothing really changes lol
A crime against humanity begins to get fixed. Chagosians will finally be allowed to go back to their homes. Mauritius will get paid a rent for the lease of the Diego Garcia base from the US.
Also, Mauritius is a signatory of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and thus no nuclear weapons are allowed within its territory. TBD if there will be a special agreement allowing special sovereignty for the US/UK, which might allow the US to station nuclear weapons there (which it probably currently does).
So there's definitely change. The UK and US finally accepted their crime, which is extremely rare. Genuinely, are there other examples of them suffering consequences (even if their consequences are a return to the status quo, ish), for other of their violations of international law and/or crimes against humanity? None come to mind.
- toyg 2y ago> might allow the US to station nuclear weapons there (which it probably currently does) It's a bit more than probable - being one of the very few places in the world where nuclear submarines can dock. It's also extremely unlikely to change; even if no specific verbiage is in the treaty, US/UK will likely continue to do as they please; Mauritius will simply look the other way in exchange for money and protection. Realpolitik is a thing.
- sofixa 2y agoWho would Mauritius need protection from? Money will probably be the only thing to convince them.
- toyg 2y agoProtection is not just about military matters - it's about relationships. Mauritius will likely want to push other stuff at the UN level, bid for money from international bodies, etc etc... US help in those matters will be valuable.
- dghlsakjg 2y agoChinese fishing fleets on the commercial side. I'm not sure China would mind having a place to station assets either.
- o11c 2y ago> Chagosians will finally be allowed to go back to their homes. This is a reminder that these islands were uninhabited prior to European discovery. It is true that they imported ... basically slaves ... from/via semi-nearby islands to work on it, but it's not like it was some ancestral island to them. When the work stopped, they were returned to the islands their ancestors came from (or at least via). (This case is somewhat different than the also-originally-uninhabited Falkland Islands, where most people living there were always of European descent).
- sofixa 2y agoThey still spent a few centuries there, similar to the Falkland islanders. Descent is irrelevant - a group of people has been living in a previously uninhabited place for a few centuries, it's their home. And they weren't "returned", they were expelled from their homes and dumped somewhere else with no assistance.
- o11c 2y agoThat would be true if it were the same workers descending from prior workers. But especially in the last decades it was exactly the opposite.