It's Hong Kong all over again

This Green and Surprisingly Pleasant Land see ominous parallels between the experience of Hongkongers and the people of the Chagos Islands as the last shreds of empire are dismantled

You may not have heard the hollow laughter coming from Hong Kong over Britain’s agreement with Mauritius to cede the sovereignty of the Chagos islands for at least 99 years. The agreement was made without the slightest attempt to consult the Chagos islanders who Britain kicked out in the 1960s and 70s to create a military base.

As the last remnants of empire are being dismantled the fate of Chagossians mirrors the experience of Hong Kong’s people who were handed over to Chinese rule without being allowed any role in determining their future.

Hong Kong became a British colony in 1842 as a result of a deal signed with China’s imperial rulers to end the Opium Wars. This was followed by a number of other humiliating treaties where China was forced to cede land, including a 1898 treaty giving Britain insisted the right to expand its rather small island colony by grabbing part of the Chinese mainland on a 99 year lease.

Hong Kong, like the Chagos islands, at the time of colonisation, was sparsely populated and, again mirroring the experience in the Indian Ocean, saw its population grow as a result of settlement from outside. In the case of the Chagos Islands the population expanded with the arrival of African slaves.

As time went on it became clear that Hong Kong island (granted in perpetuity to Britain) would not be viable if most of its landmass on the mainland was returned to China under the terms of the 99 year lease.

Thus negotiation with Beijing began in the mid- 1980s by which time Hong Kong’s population had multiplied many times over and this tiny colony had a booming economy. However when it came to discussing the colony’s future, the people who lived there were rigorously prevented (largely at China’s insistence) from taking part in the negotiations.

Only after the deal was agreed did the British authorities concoct a deeply dubious consultation process which unsurprisingly concluded that the majority of Hongkongers were happy with the agreement, one that was anyway beyond amendment.

The Chagossians faced a more cruel fate as they were summarily expelled from their homes after a 1965 UK-US agreement to create a US military base on Diego Garcia, the biggest of the islands. In 1968 Mauritius, which had been governed by Britain alongside the islands, was granted independence but without the islands as part of the package. Under the agreement signed this month they will come under Mauritian rule.

Like Hongkongers, the people of the islands, were left out in the cold as this agreement was made. Yet Britain is hailing this deal with Mauritius as a triumph of decolonisation. Maybe  there is a scintilla of guilt in British minds because the agreement for the handover states that ‘the treaty will address wrongs of the past and demonstrate the commitment of both parties to support the welfare of Chagossians.’ There is a vague undertaking that Mauritius may allow the people to return to their homes and talk of a trust fund to support the islanders.

Less vague is the agreement to keep the US military base in place because this is what really matters, not the fate of some 10,000 pesky islanders dismissed by a UK official in the 1960s as a group of ‘Man Fridays and Tarzans’. His cable was revealed by WikiLeaks in 2010 and there was a degree of embarrassment but Britain soon got over it. What mattered, and has largely dominated the response to this recent agreement, is the focus on securing the future of the US military base.

When Hongkongers read about the vague promises made to salve Britain’s conscience in the Chagos Islands they will be vividly aware of the worth of British promises. Britain and China agreed to a raft undertakings giving Hong Kong autonomy and allowing it to continue its way of life distinct from the system of dictatorship prevailing on the Chinese mainland.

China pretended to accept these conditions but now describes the treaty it signed with Britain as being no more than a historical document of no contemporary relevance. The promises of autonomy have turned out to be meaningless and while Britain occasionally bleats about how jolly bad this all is, nothing further has been done.

Mauritius is quite pally with China these days and might well be seeking advice as to how pledges surrounding its treaty should be implemented after a suitable period has elapsed.