6 ms·

It's easier to move a single military base at the end of a lease than an entire country

mmooss 2y ago
AFAIK, the US and UK value Diego Garcia because currently there aren't geographical alternatives for that base. Where else could they put it that would have the same benefits?
- ethbr1 2y ago
  There are multiple islands and archipelagos in the region. Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island Diego Garcia just happened to be forcibly depopulated by the British, so was a convenient choice.
  - reaperducer 2y ago
    Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island That's the whole point of Diego Garcia: It's not "close to" anywhere, and it's nearly in the middle of a bunch of places. That's what give it its strategic importance.
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      The Maldives are only ~400mi N of Diego Garcia.
      - vel0city 2y ago
        So its 400mi away from another set of tiny islands which themselves are hundreds of miles from the mainland. I'd still argue that's pretty much "not close to anywhere."
  - mmooss 2y ago
    I mean, what current option is equivalent to Diego Garcia? Are any of those options realistic right now?
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      They're all pretty far from land and in the same general area. If Diego Garcia were no longer an option, there would be alternatives. Especially with US levels of lease money. That said, few of them are quite as remote as Diego Garcia. Which means not quite as easy to secretly fly RQ-180s or whatever the hell is more clandestinely based there.
      - mmooss 2y ago
        I don't think geography is the challenge as much as politics. What country and populace will give up their ancestral land to a foreign military base. Would you? Remember that the small islands don't have much land to begin with, and bases are large.
        ethbr1 2y ago
        A country that's desperate for infrastructure investment and foreign reserves, because they don't have much usable land to start with? At some point leasing away an island, so that everyone else can have a better quality of life, is an attractive tradeoff.
- BurningFrog 2y ago
  The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable. To a 1925 (99 years ago) military force, the Diego Garcia airfield would have had zero importance.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    I wonder if they would have anticipated its value. I can anticipate a moon base would be valuable in 2123 even though it has little present value.
    - input_sh 2y ago
      Considering that 99 years ago both Maldives and India were still colonised (and would remain so for decades), I'm gonna go out on a limb by saying that no, Chagos Islands weren't seen as particularly important back then.
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    > The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable. I bet that's what the UK thought about Hong Kong in the late 1800s, but when 1996 rolled around I think they (and many HKers) would have liked a longer-and-99-years lease. While geography isn't quite destiny, it is fairly important, and having a random rock in a place where there are no other rocks will always be useful IMHO (unless we perhaps develop teleportation).
  - BobAliceInATree 2y ago
    in 99 years, most of the island probably will be underwater due to climate change.
    - vixen99 2y ago
      Further information on 13,000 islands: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2329816#abstract https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2... "Of over 13,000 islands examined, approximately 12% experienced significant shifts in shoreline positions. The total shoreline length of these islands approaches 200,000 km, with 7.57% showing signs of landward erosion and 6.05% expanding seaward. Human activities, particularly reclamation and land filling, were identified as primary drivers of local shoreline transformations, while natural factors have a comparatively minor impact. "
- fosk 2y ago
  I am sure that if at the end of 99 years the US or the UK still really really want to retain them, they will find a way (another lease, or by force). Mauritius is not China. Not that I am suggesting for this to happen, but what are they going to do if the UK just decides not to leave after 99 years?
  - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
    They said basically the same thing about HongKong. You can’t predict political landscape in 100 years
    - Yeul 2y ago
      The Chinese negotiators for Kowloon deliberately settled on 99 years. Probably because they knew they'd be lynched by the Chinese public otherwise. It was not a mistake made by the British they just couldn't get a better deal.

AFAIK, the US and UK value Diego Garcia because currently there aren't geographical alternatives for that base. Where else could they put it that would have the same benefits?

ethbr1 2y ago
There are multiple islands and archipelagos in the region. Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island Diego Garcia just happened to be forcibly depopulated by the British, so was a convenient choice.
- reaperducer 2y ago
  Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island That's the whole point of Diego Garcia: It's not "close to" anywhere, and it's nearly in the middle of a bunch of places. That's what give it its strategic importance.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    The Maldives are only ~400mi N of Diego Garcia.
    - vel0city 2y ago
      So its 400mi away from another set of tiny islands which themselves are hundreds of miles from the mainland. I'd still argue that's pretty much "not close to anywhere."
- mmooss 2y ago
  I mean, what current option is equivalent to Diego Garcia? Are any of those options realistic right now?
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    They're all pretty far from land and in the same general area. If Diego Garcia were no longer an option, there would be alternatives. Especially with US levels of lease money. That said, few of them are quite as remote as Diego Garcia. Which means not quite as easy to secretly fly RQ-180s or whatever the hell is more clandestinely based there.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      I don't think geography is the challenge as much as politics. What country and populace will give up their ancestral land to a foreign military base. Would you? Remember that the small islands don't have much land to begin with, and bases are large.
      - ethbr1 2y ago
        A country that's desperate for infrastructure investment and foreign reserves, because they don't have much usable land to start with? At some point leasing away an island, so that everyone else can have a better quality of life, is an attractive tradeoff.
BurningFrog 2y ago
The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable. To a 1925 (99 years ago) military force, the Diego Garcia airfield would have had zero importance.
- mmooss 2y ago
  I wonder if they would have anticipated its value. I can anticipate a moon base would be valuable in 2123 even though it has little present value.
  - input_sh 2y ago
    Considering that 99 years ago both Maldives and India were still colonised (and would remain so for decades), I'm gonna go out on a limb by saying that no, Chagos Islands weren't seen as particularly important back then.
- throw0101d 2y ago
  > The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable. I bet that's what the UK thought about Hong Kong in the late 1800s, but when 1996 rolled around I think they (and many HKers) would have liked a longer-and-99-years lease. While geography isn't quite destiny, it is fairly important, and having a random rock in a place where there are no other rocks will always be useful IMHO (unless we perhaps develop teleportation).
- BobAliceInATree 2y ago
  in 99 years, most of the island probably will be underwater due to climate change.
  - vixen99 2y ago
    Further information on 13,000 islands: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2329816#abstract https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2... "Of over 13,000 islands examined, approximately 12% experienced significant shifts in shoreline positions. The total shoreline length of these islands approaches 200,000 km, with 7.57% showing signs of landward erosion and 6.05% expanding seaward. Human activities, particularly reclamation and land filling, were identified as primary drivers of local shoreline transformations, while natural factors have a comparatively minor impact. "
fosk 2y ago
I am sure that if at the end of 99 years the US or the UK still really really want to retain them, they will find a way (another lease, or by force). Mauritius is not China. Not that I am suggesting for this to happen, but what are they going to do if the UK just decides not to leave after 99 years?
- ClumsyPilot 2y ago
  They said basically the same thing about HongKong. You can’t predict political landscape in 100 years
  - Yeul 2y ago
    The Chinese negotiators for Kowloon deliberately settled on 99 years. Probably because they knew they'd be lynched by the Chinese public otherwise. It was not a mistake made by the British they just couldn't get a better deal.