I suspect that when Hong Kong reverted to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the UK assumed that its remaining "Little Empire of Leftovers" would be its to keep in perpetuity, because the territories that were left had either fiercely pro-British populations (as in the case of the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar), or were too geographically remote for other countries to plausibly stake a claim on them and too small to be plausible contenders for full independence (as in the case of Pitcairn). Well, the handing over of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, albeit with all the imperfections of a 99-year lease back to the UK and US of Diego Garcia, is a massive jolt to that complacency, because the UK has been forced to this point by a brilliant diplomatic campaign by the government of Mauritius. It's entirely possible to see how that could be a model for picking off some of the other UK overseas dependencies.
Next in line is surely Cyprus, which is the most comparable to the Chagos situation, because the UK simply decided to confiscate 4% of Cypriot territory as a condition for the country becoming independent. The military bases on that retained territory have seemingly been used recently to assist Israel in its genocidal campaign in Gaza. The precedent of Diego Garcia surely means that those bases must revert to Cypriot sovereignty and any continued UK military presence there would only be acceptable as the result of an agreed settlement.
I've never taken the view that Spain has a legitimate claim on Gibraltar or that Argentina has a legitimate claim on the Falklands. Both territories have stable populations which have exactly the same right to self-determination as the people of Scotland, and they have exercised that right by decisively rejecting Spanish and Argentinian rule. But I do think in time those populations, probably starting with Gibraltar, may come to see the value of essentially keeping their current system but changing the title deeds, ie. becoming nominally independent but entering into a free association agreement with the UK to allow London to continue controlling their foreign affairs and defence. That would demonstrate to the world that decolonisation has occurred and make them masters of their own house. In the case of Gibraltar it would require Spanish cooperation to circumvent the provisions of the Treaty of Utrecht, but one day there might be a Spanish government with the foresight to realise that decolonisation of Gibraltar is actually in Spanish interests.
In the case of the small Caribbean dependencies, the increasing development of pan-Caribbean governance structures may eventually provide the architecture that would make it viable to shake off the London link.
Meanwhile, there are also broader "Little Empires", covering the independent states where King Charles is still monarch, or where the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still has jurisdiction as the final court of appeal. Both of those empires are continuing to contract, with Barbados recently becoming a republic, and Saint Lucia becoming the latest country to abolish Privy Council jurisdiction last year. It's surely only a matter of time before Australia and Jamaica adopt home-grown heads of state, which will probably lead to others following their example.
The tide of history is only moving in one direction, and it would be naive of unionists to think Scotland is immune to it. I remember in my childhood hearing Alan Whicker talk about the upcoming Hong Kong handover. He said "when the sun sets on the British Empire, it'll set over Kowloon Harbour". But actually when it really sets, it may be over the cliffs of St Kilda.
Well done Mauritius!
ReplyDeleteThis shows UN pressure can have results, a route that Salvo/ Liberation are proposing
ReplyDeleteIt's not comparable. Mauritius was listened to because it's already a sovereign state.
DeleteHow many bottles of Buckie have you had?
DeleteMore chance of KC sighting Nessie than there is of Our Precious Union existing at the end of the decade.
DeleteI take it that’s a typo, and you meant year rather than decade.
DeleteGood point! Yes, it's crumbling fast.
DeleteThe St Kilda reference is a powerful piece of writing.
ReplyDeleteIsrael claims it is targeting specific people across a number of countries. It’s intelligence must be excellent to do this.
ReplyDeleteYet it also claims it knew nothing about thousands of Hamas preparing/training for its massacre on Oct last year.
One or both must be a lie.
If Cyprus has some serious political Leaders they must act now, because the issue is exactly the same
ReplyDeleteMr Kelly, what are the details of the agreement? I read Diego Garcia is on lease to the US aswell as the uk , does It mean the British have technically lost sovereignity on that Island too?
ReplyDeleteThe legal gibberish is that the UK will be "authorised to exercise Mauritius' sovereign rights in Diego Garcia". The position will be the same as Guantanamo Bay, which is technically under Cuban sovereignty but no-one doubts that the Americans are in charge.
DeleteIt looks like the lease will officially be to the UK alone, rather than to the UK and US jointly (although in practice it's a US base).
It was the Labour government who removed the Chagos folk from their Islands.
ReplyDeleteI've looked at the anonymous comment at 4.42 (now deleted) very carefully and have come to the conclusion that it was KC who magically acquired the "Mauritian auntie". Apologies if I'm wrong but I do believe it was him.
ReplyDeleteYup, definitely KC. The faux outrage in faux "Scots" was an even bigger giveaway than the original post. Ye nae hae a Mauritian auntie, ye nae!
Delete