The Mauritian government is presenting a resolution at the UN this Friday. What do you think of this step taken towards claiming sovereignty over Chagos?

Mauritius has been very dignified in the way it has responded to severe provocation in terms of the loss of its territory. The United Kingdom’s position has been essentially to “make up the rules as it goes along”, to quote the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. It is an issue which may lie beyond the reach of international law, though there is some progress being made. The award of the UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal, although not touching directly on the matter of sovereignty, did hold that the undertaking given by the UK to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius when it’s no longer needed for defence purposed is a legally binding obligation.

What is at stake for the US if Mauritius wins its case and gets back the Chagos Archipelago?

The Chagos Archipelago, or at least its main island Diego Garcia, is probably the US’ most important military base outside of the US mainland. They have invested hugely in terms of military infrastructure on the small island of Diego Garcia. So if the lease for Diego Garcia isn’t renewed in December, they stand to lose a highly valuable investment.

How much is Diego Garcia actually worth?

Since 1971, there has been over 3 billion US dollars invested in enhancing the military infrastructure and that’s a quite conservative estimate. That’s just for infrastructure, you also have to add the military equipment, the aircraft, the nuclear powered submarines, the ammunitions and explosives. Some commentators have said that this is the most valuable piece of real estate on the planet. But it’s not just about the money. The US have used this base as a centre in several military campaigns in recent times, for example in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Diego Garcia has played an important part in what is referred to as the ‘‘war on terror’’.

What has precisely been the role of the Diego Garcia base in the ‘‘war on terror’’?

Many of the bombing raids which have been carried out by the US and its allies have been conducted via Diego Garcia. In the context of Iraq, the Chilcot report, recently published in the UK, found that the British government did not exhaust all non-military means prior to going to war. That finding really strikes at the heart of whether or not Diego Garcia is needed for defence purposes. If it is being used in military campaigns before all non-military options have been exhausted, then I would suggest that rather than being used for defence purposes, it’s being used for attack purposes. This is a fundamental question on the necessity of the base as a defence for either the UK or the US. One has to ask what their interests are in the Indian Ocean region for them to have this base.

So for you the debate goes beyond the claim to a territory?

I think what’s happened with Chagos should concern the entire world. Apart from the expulsion of the indigenous population, the use to which the islands are being put by the UKUS coalition gives rise to another category of concerns. I’m not just speaking of the innocent civilian victims of the war in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria or indeed the people who have been displaced because of the military activities. I am also talking about the people who may have been brought to Diego Garcia on extraordinary rendition flights as well.

Should Mauritius be the one raising these issues?

Mauritius finds itself in an impossible position because this is an area where the UK and the US do not want to be subject to criticism, nor do they want awkward questions about human rights to be raised. Issue of the return of the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius is certainly a great inconvenience to these two powers. One thing probably that should be done is to shift the focus from the ‘‘war against terror’’ to ‘‘a dialogue on human rights’’. This ‘‘war against terror’’ has been used in the argument that Diego Garcia is necessary for defence purposes, we need to challenge this perception. The war on terror, depending where you live on this planet, can be seen more as a war of terror because it’s the use of force to obtain political ends. Is the US using Diego Garcia in order to obtain global dominance and a world order to its liking essentially or is it being used in response to threats? It is safe to say that the threats that exist now have been created by the activities of the US rather than being a response. The UK and the US need to be named and shamed. We need to see the questions asked on Diego Garcia, we need to ask for independent inspections by humanitarian bodies, to see what facilities there are, the use to which they are being put.

‘‘One thing that probably should be done is to shift the focus from the war against terror to a dialogue on human rights.’’

You mentioned extraordinary rendition. What is that exactly?

It is the illegal practice whereby people who are of interest to the CIA have been brought to a detention centre for questioning. They have been essentially snatched off the streets in various locations around the world and taken to detention centres. Some of these are in Europe, one is Guantanamo Bay and there have been speculations and reports as to a black-site prison on Diego Garcia. It’s very difficult to know anything beyond the assurances of the UK government and they have proved untrue in the Abdel Hakim Belhaj case.

It was subsequently acknowledged that, notwithstanding the denials in the UK Parliament, Diego Garcia has been used for extraordinary rendition flights. Mr Belhaj was taken along with his pregnant wife from Thailand and and subjected to extraordinary rendition via Diego Garcia in order to be interrogated.

You said extraordinary rendition is an illegal practice. How many laws, conventions and treaties are actually being disregarded on Diego Garcia?

There have been breaches of several of the UN conventions and the lack of independent verification, of knowing what’s happening there is of great concern when answering such a question. Recently, I had the opportunity to talk to the UN Mines Action Service in relation to the Dublin Convention and the Ottawa Convention, which respectively prohibits the use of cluster munitions and the use of anti-personnel mines. There have been reports that these types of weapons have been stored in vessels in the waters around Diego Garcia for years by the US military for use in their campaigns. Where on one hand the UN is seeking the universalisation of these instruments so that they have global applications, on the other hand a country like the UK is arguing that if they haven’t explicitly ratified the convention in relation to their overseas territory, they should not apply. A systematic investigation of all potential breaches of international treaties and conventions can also be of value to Mauritius to strengthen its case.

And what is the position of the EU on the Chagos issue?

The Chagos are governed by the EU laws and treaties since as a so-called British Indian Ocean Territory, it is classified as one of the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) with which the EU has a particular relationship. Essentially EU law requires the Union to enhance its cooperation in such a region and to reduce the vulnerability of the area and also respect fundamental human rights, liberty and democracy. So when we look at the actual reality of what’s happening, we see there has been very little effort to uphold these commitments as far as Chagos is concerned. The EU’s task was always going to be difficult, for example to improve the economy of this particular OCT when according to the UK government, it doesn’t have an economy in the normal sense. Of course, what it does have is a very important and active military economy. In that regard, what the CIA says in its world fact book, is that the economy of the region relies on postage stamps and fishing licences. So nothing said there about the lucrative contracts which have been awarded to various players from a military perspective.

What sort of lucrative business?

There are lucrative contracts awarded to certain private security and other agencies, for example G4S, Parsons and Swire Pacific Offshore. It is essentially a military economy on Diego Garcia and here I’m mindful of what Hillary Clinton said in 2011, when she spoke about the need to look at Iraq as a business opportunity. The US economy does rely on its the military sector, the production of weapons and armaments. We need to hear from Hillary Clinton, especially considering she’s a presidential nominee, what exactly is on the military agenda. In the case of Iraq, did she mean a military business opportunity?

Without any regulatory body or any public record on Diego Garcia, how can we know what’s happening there?

Through chance and circumstance we do get a glimpse of what’s happening there. On a daily basis, with 2000-3000 personnel, some information does trickle through. Also, there were some crime statistics released last year following a Freedom of Information request. However, we know that there are other activities which are not being reported. It’s been suggested that there’s a black prison in Diego Garcia. This report comes from Mr Lawrence Wilkerson who was Colin Powell’s ex-Chief of staff. This is a man who would be in a position to know what’s happening in Diego Garcia and he has stated that the island was used by CIA to carry out what he called ‘‘nefarious activities’’ with individuals being taken there for interrogation, with all it entails. Some commentators have called it a black hole concerning human rights, which is essentially off the radar.

Are the concerned organisations looking the other way while so many laws, conventions and treaties are breached?

I think people who try to shine a light on what’s happening in Diego Garcia can very easily find themselves facing criticism that they are against the US in its fight against terror. It is a real danger because those people can be labelled as supporters of radicals and fundamentalists. But these questions need to be asked, not least because of the probable renewal of the lease in December. The world needs to say to the UK: “Look, what your tenant is doing here in Diego Garcia is not in accordance with international law.” Essentially as landlord, the UK has an obligation to ensure that whatever is done on the islands is lawful.

How much is Diego Garcia a defence or rather how much of a threat is this military base?

Whatever the initial purpose of the base, in the aftermath of the Cold War, it does not serve any meaningful defence purpose today for the US and the UK. I am not convinced of that. I have no doubt these countries will say differently but I think we have reached a point where we have to question whether Diego Garcia is being used for defence or attack. We have to consider the risk that has been created in the Indian Ocean as a result of the use to which Diego Garcia has been put. And we also have to consider the question of whether or not the base itself has become a terrorist target. While one would not want to be alarmist or give credibility to conspiracy theories, it is a fact that this question has been raised in the EU Parliament. It is a fair question that needs to be considered.