Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#61

Post by saiya-jin »

Loic wrote: post #50
Leherenn wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

France has a few territories in a rather similar situation, and possibly the Netherlands as well. They probably don't want to anger the UK because they might need their support in the future if the same kind of vote happens to them, but at the same time, if they support the UK, a lot of countries will remember it and it could swing the vote against them. At this point the best game is not to play. For Germany, I do n…

For France, it is even more sensitive as we are in the process of giving some of these territories more rights or simply full independence. This is a long and painful process for all the involved parties anyway because you dig again in the past often violent history of the territories.

Evil of the past should never be ignored. No point of overthinking and being too emotional about it, but there are good lessons to be learned there

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#62

Post by mattmanser »

zakum1 wrote: post #40
papaf wrote: post #4

This is a British source that describes why the Chagos islands are so contentious: https://politicsfirst.co.uk/editorials/britains-shame-the-et...

It is staggering to hear arguments justifying occupied land that has absolutely no connection to the uk. It shows how poorly the west still understands the evil of colonialism. Regardless of the ancestry of the people living in any territory, they deserve to have sovereignty over their lives.

Err, we did actually pay for it.

And what connection do the "natives" have, they weren't native to it. They'd lived there less than 200 years and were French speakers.

It's not an indigenous population.

It's more complicated than you claim.

I'm pretty strongly anti-colonial, but this ain't that and it takes the piss to frame it like it is.

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#63

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

narag wrote: post #57
arethuza wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would perhaps be a bit hypocritical of Spain given their own enclaves like Melilla and Ceuta in Morocco - both of which are claimed by Morocco?

There are subtle differences. Gibraltar was Spanish before The Utrech Treaty, that even included some expiration date IIRC. Ceuta and Melilla were Spanish towns before Morocco even existed. Not that it will matter in the long run...

Apart from the expiration date issue, the British unilaterally extended their territory taking more land than they were assigned by the Utrecht treaty, several times. Sometimes using such scummy techniques as asking the Spanish government for permission to temporarily built sick houses outside their border during a cholera outbreak, and when the outbreak was over... they just kept that territory.

To be honest, I'm not a patriot by any means and I do think that Ceuta and Melilla will probably need to be handed to Morocco at some point, as enclaves in general don't make much sense. But the situation is not even remotely comparable from a legal and historical standpoint. I don't think the differences can even be called "subtle".

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#64

Post by dogma1138 »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #53
tluyben2 wrote: post #41

I am not really interested in politics, but I am curious why countries abstain. They surely have an opinion; my countries (born in NL, live in ES) had NL abstain and ES vote against the UK. Now I can understand why Spain voted; a lot of people are of the opinion that UK left EU and they should suffer a lot for it. It's a underbelly thing but it's quite accepted here. They want Gibraltar and they want to see them (UK)…

I'm sure that Spain would vote against the UK irrespective of Brexit. If you have some territory illegally occupied by the British in your very country, it's obvious that you are going to vote against the British occupying territory elsewhere. It's coherent with Spanish foreign policy for many decades, from far before Brexit was even a talking point. I haven't noticed any will of the Spanish government to punish the…

Gibraltar isn’t illegally occupied, that said Spain has always been stuck between a rock and a hard place since they have their own walled off enclaves in Morocco and they also have problems with independence movements internally with both Catalonia and the Basques claiming independence to various degree.

This is why regardless of how much Spain wants to push the UK to secede Gibraltar they can’t push too hard.

The Netherlands have the same problem they also have remote territories under their control so again they can only abstain.

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#65

Post by tangue »

tomohawk wrote: post #60

Don't kid yourself that this is about the islander's claims. They are being used as human shields. Diego Garcia is a very strategic location. It will always be controlled by one of the great powers. Who would benefit most if the US were to leave? Who has the most to gain? Countries like China and Iran.

True. And it's important not to over-estimate the value of this vote. France had been condemned by the UN for the return of the island of Mayotte to Comoros, New Caledonia is another example. And let's not talk about Palestine and Israel... UN votes have, in the best case, a symbolical value

[1] https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/165500

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#66

Post by seszett »

klipt wrote: post #30
sispeo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the folks there are happy to be French, enjoying the EU passport and French safety net.

I'm sure a bunch of people in third world countries would be happy to have US/EU passports, but it would still be colonialism for US/European countries to annex them, wouldn't it?

Well, Réunion was not "annexed" either, it was settled by France while it was unpopulated and most people descend from settlers from France (to various degrees, as the population is very mixed). Its situation is probably comparable to the Azores.

There has literally never been any sizable independence sentiment and it's unlikely to appear in the foreseeable future.

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#67

Post by ijuhoor »

ilaksh wrote: post #21

Does this mean that people can return to those islands? Certainly seems unlikely they would close the military base unless they were forced to so do by some military or substantial economic action. This type of thing is what makes me worried about the long term sustainability of US security. The paradigm is not really rule of law when it comes right down to it, it's might makes right. This is an inherently insecure p…

Full disclaimer: I am Mauritian and work in the UK. I am happy about the regognition in the UN and the ICJ’s decision even that it is quite late and a lot of Chagosians already suffered a lot. I would say the Mauritian Gov is interested in the fishing rights provided by the islands which is critical for us. I would like to see .io domain be given back to a Chagosian association and let them use the income from it. It could be used to develop transport to the island and resume coconut farming, fishing, tourism... I would like to see more pressure being applied to UK, because to be honest i don’t see them doing anything and just do like they always did so far, ignore ans delay any actions to be done there. Ps: the Gigaom acticle about it is great to understand the situation. Pss: the US has no need for a base there, their base in Bahrain and Qatar are much closer to their illegitimate war interests.

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#68

Post by seszett »

avs733 wrote: post #19
kabwj wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They discovered and conquered these places a long time ago. Those places basically belong to them. That’s how it works.

"discovered" How do you discover a place that people already are or know about? I'll give you a hint...you don't. You show up their, subjugate the locals, and claim your history as the history of civilization itself.

To be clear, although it was already known by fishermen, this archipelago was not occupied by locals and was first settled by the European countries that deemed it a worthy endeavour (although mostly using slaves of course).

European colonisation isn't rosy, but there is a lot of misinformation out there and things happened widely differently in different places. It's really far from being a simple "subjugate the locals and appropriate their lands" story everywhere.

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#69

Post by lmm »

klipt wrote: post #30
sispeo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the folks there are happy to be French, enjoying the EU passport and French safety net.

I'm sure a bunch of people in third world countries would be happy to have US/EU passports, but it would still be colonialism for US/European countries to annex them, wouldn't it?

Would it be colonialism isn't really the question. Would it be ethical? That's closer to the question, but really what's important is: what's the most ethical way forward starting from where we are now?

Re: UK suffers defeat in UN vote on Chagos Islands

#70

Post by raesene9 »

crowbahr wrote: post #36
tangue wrote: post #25

This is why you shouldn't use .io domains. It sounds cool but you're indirectly sponsoring a military base where people were tortured and because of which people were deported.

Based on cursory research the British government has refuted the claim that any money is given to them from .io domain registrations.

Well whoever's getting the money, it's not the indigenous islanders who should be getting it.
Post reply on HN