UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius • Hacker News Board

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#251

Post by throw0101d » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 12:21 PM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #100

mmooss wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

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.

> 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).

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#252

Post by berdario » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 12:51 PM UTC

InsomniacL wrote: post #235

s_dev wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What exactly is the Mauritian connection to the Chagos Archipelago? I can see where this line of questioning is going but what's the connection between Britain and Chagos or the US and Chagos for that matter?

215 years of British sovereignty? The United States of America has had sovereignty of itself for 248 years, should the USA give up it's sovereignty in North America or do you draw the line between somewhere between 215 and 248? At what point do you say, it is what it is?

The obvious difference, is that you're comparing sovereignty over a nation/state's mainland, vs sovereignty over a separate colony, thousands of km away from the mainland (and even used only for military purposes, apparently)

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#253

Post by callamdelaney » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 1:06 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #211

callamdelaney wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in 299 years the climate may have changed again, as it is wont to do (and has always done).

And 65 million years ago an asteroid detonated with the power of all of the world’s nukes combined, so there is no need to worry about nuclear war. And timespans are like that for climate too, millions of years not 299

The little ice age lasted from 1300 to 1850 [0], so 299 years is not orders of magnitudes off.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#254

Post by InsomniacL » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 1:17 PM UTC

berdario wrote: post #252

InsomniacL wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

215 years of British sovereignty? The United States of America has had sovereignty of itself for 248 years, should the USA give up it's sovereignty in North America or do you draw the line between somewhere between 215 and 248? At what point do you say, it is what it is?

The obvious difference, is that you're comparing sovereignty over a nation/state's mainland, vs sovereignty over a separate colony, thousands of km away from the mainland (and even used only for military purposes, apparently)

Hawaii then, 3,200 km away from the US mainland, home to one of the largest US navel bases and only part of the US for the last 126 years when they annexed it?

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#255

Post by vel0city » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 1:41 PM UTC

ethbr1 wrote: post #160

reaperducer wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The Maldives are only ~400mi N of Diego Garcia.

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."

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#256

Post by etothepii » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 1:48 PM UTC

SllX wrote: post #149

etothepii wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for this? I am not aware of any practically significant way in which the crown dependencies are different from the OTs. AMA 7.5 year resident of Bermuda.

Sure. Here’s the UK’s fact sheet on their relationship with the Crown Dependencies including some of the differences with overseas territories. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... High level overview is that it doesn’t look that different, and like most things concerning UK law and the laws of Crown Dependencies, a lot of it is just custom. There’s long been a debate over how much the UK’s…

Bermuda is trully wonderful. If you read HN you can easily figure out my e-Mail, feel free to drop me a message if interested further. Bermuda is the place to be if founding an insurance related start-up and probably of doing anything fintech related.

The weather is delightful, the taxes acceptable, the digital infrastructure ok. It can be an expensive place to live but a single person with no dependants could live here on $4k a month. The path to permanent residence is difficult but manageable for those who bring real value to the place (think jobs or significant capital). The people are generally friendly (though as with anywhere there are exceptions) and the Premier has at least some Software experience.

It is a very interesting question, in my humble opinion, As to Bermuda's relations with the British crown. So far as I am aware there has never been a law passed by the British parliament and enforced through the privy council which was not passed by the Bermuda Parliament before commencement. Importantly (and uniquely for the OTs). Bermuda was established prior to the Act of Union and so has a relationship with the "crown of England" rather than the "crown of Great Britain" having been settled in 1612.

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#257

Post by bpodgursky » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 2:34 PM UTC

Thiez wrote: post #221

toyg wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but when $dictator shows up on tv and talks about figthing $bloodyColonialists at the UN, it's uncontroversial (regardless of the issue being fought) and takes time from talking about his embezzlement/corruption/etc. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, they can go cap in hand to $bloodyColonialists and ask "do you want me to shut up? Give me $something". This requires no shadowy influence from this or that supposed Gr…

This all just speaks in favor of decolonialization, does it not? When decolonialisation is complete the $dictator won't be able to use it as a distraction, nor can it be a source of corruption. And apart from that it's a noble and objectively good goal in itself.

No, because they will always find some phantom menace of colonization to complain about.

Look at the Chagos Islands themselves — they were literally not inhabited until Europeans settled them. There's no "decolonization" narrative here, because there's no native population.

Once the UK leaves the Chagos islands, it will be about foreign aid with strings attached, or IMF loans, or foreign investment in farmland, or whatever. It's not a solvable problem.

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#258

Post by dangus » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 2:48 PM UTC

ethbr1 wrote: post #141

dangus wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a mistake to give in to the temptation to jump to the conclusion that China is a tunnel-vision cult of personality everything-the-crazy-dictator-wants-he-gets government. The Chinese government under Xi has a well-established track record of long-term planning that has done nothing but elevated China's status and leverage in the world. It really couldn't be further from (e.g.) Putin's style of governance…

Sidelining potential political competitors and/or forcing them out of the public sphere doesn't inspire confidence in Xi's ability to resist using power conveniently. > The Chinese government under Xi has a well-established track record of long-term planning that has done nothing but elevated China's status and leverage in the world. Some of its neighbors in the South China Sea would beg to differ. E.g. https://m.you…

I’m confused at what your video is supposed to disprove about what I said.

China rammed into a Philippine ship knowing they would face zero consequences.

Did they face any consequences?

China’s neighbors can hem and haw all they want. China is the superpower in the Eastern Hemisphere.

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#259

Post by dangus » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 2:49 PM UTC

throwawaymaths wrote: post #178

dangus wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a mistake to give in to the temptation to jump to the conclusion that China is a tunnel-vision cult of personality everything-the-crazy-dictator-wants-he-gets government. The Chinese government under Xi has a well-established track record of long-term planning that has done nothing but elevated China's status and leverage in the world. It really couldn't be further from (e.g.) Putin's style of governance…

> elevated China's status In 2024 china issued 17% less residence visas than 2019. Maybe. But the trend is down.

What does residence visas have to do with geopolitical power?

That’s one tiny variable of many.

Should I link you an article about how US immigration hit record lows after the Covid-19 pandemic?

Re: UK will give sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

#260

Post by s_dev » Fri, Oct 04, 2024, 3:00 PM UTC

InsomniacL wrote: post #235

s_dev wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What exactly is the Mauritian connection to the Chagos Archipelago? I can see where this line of questioning is going but what's the connection between Britain and Chagos or the US and Chagos for that matter?

215 years of British sovereignty? The United States of America has had sovereignty of itself for 248 years, should the USA give up it's sovereignty in North America or do you draw the line between somewhere between 215 and 248? At what point do you say, it is what it is?

>At what point do you say, it is what it is?

When you've lost the argument.