It would be “very, very odd” if the UK acted “unilaterally” when it comes to the deal over the Chagos Islands, a Cabinet minister has said, after the Foreign Secretary said it would not go ahead without the backing of Donald Trump. David Lammy said on Wednesday that if the US president does not like the deal then it “will not go forward”.
The UK is in talks with Mauritius about handing over sovereignty of the territory, but leasing back the strategically important Diego Garcia military base which is used by the US. Asked whether Mr Trump was in control of UK foreign policy given Wednesday’s comments from Mr Lammy, Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle told Times Radio: “The Chagos Islands have always been a military base for the UK and the US.”.
He added: “Of course, it is absolutely essential in that particular instance that we partner very closely, and we engage very, very closely with the United States.”. Mr Kyle described the “security relationship and the intelligence relationship between the US and the UK” as a “crucial part of our special relationship”, and went on: “It would be very, very odd if we acted unilaterally when it has actually always been a bilateral arrangement which has been pivoted into the Chagos Islands.”.
It comes as Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is in Washington for talks with the US president. The Foreign Secretary said on Wednesday he still believed the agreement to cede the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius was the “best deal” which could be struck.
Asked by ITV’s Peston programme if the US leader had a veto on the agreement, Mr Lammy replied: “If President Trump doesn’t like the deal, the deal will not go forward. “The reason for that is because we have a shared military and intelligence interest with the United States, and of course they’ve got to be happy with the deal, or there is no deal.”.
Speaking from the US, he had earlier said the UK’s military and intelligence was “very intertwined with the United States”, adding: “We struck a deal. After striking that deal, there was a change of government in Mauritius, and the new government in Mauritius had to have time to look at the deal.
