The debates in the press on the Chagos Archipelago have recently flared up, following the strong condemnation by the Prime Minister of the turning of coat of the former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his Foreign Secretary. This is quite understandable.

‘C’est une colère juste’ to borrow Ségolène Royal’s remarks during the last French Presidential debates. But will our debates here lead us to a coherent strategy on Chagos?

I have been dealing with the Chagos files since 1974 when I was Assistant Secretary in the Prime Minister’s Office. I drafted replies to countless PQs on Chagos for Prime Ministers Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam and Sir Anerood Jugnauth. I continued to deal with the Chagos issue in my capacity as Supervising Officer, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, working successively with Foreign Ministers Ramduth Juddoo, Paul Berenger and Anil Gayan.

I also had the opportunity to chair one meeting of the Mauritius-British Fisheries Commission on Chagos. After Independence, successive Governments have claimed sovereignty on the Chagos Archipelago loud and clear at the UN, OAU (now AU), Commonwealth, etc but it was only in 1982 that the Constitution was amended to incorporate the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia in the State of Mauritius.

The British too claimed sovereignty over the Chagos and set up the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) as far back as 1965. The Mauritius Government has never recognised the BIOT and refers to it in official statements as ‘the so called BIOT’. Equally, there has been no formal contact between Mauritius Government and BIOT officials.

However, since the agreement between the Mauritius and British Governments in 1994, officials of both countries used to meet every year at the level of the Mauritius British Fisheries Commission to exchange notes on technical matters relating to fisheries and marine conservation. The sovereignty issue was always kept at bay in these meetings.

It was the responsibility of the Prime Minister and his Foreign Minister to discuss the sovereignty issue with the British Government. In these discussions the British would tell us that the Chagos issue was linked with the US military base in Diego Garcia and that they would necessary have to consult the US.

The US would in turn tell us that they dealt only with the British with whom they had a formal agreement on the use of Diego Garcia. It was like a ping-pong game. The official letter which Ms Condolezza Rice, former US Secretary of State wrote in 2001, to the then Deputy Prime Minister Paul Bérenger and the latter’s meeting with Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary in London, could have moved the process in the right direction by holding triangular meetings for the first time. But the 9/11 terrorist attacks on US changed the security landscape completely and in fact increased the prominence of Diego Garcia as a vital US military base. The legal channel has also been explored.

However, this is a long and costly affair. When later the Government decided to change its strategy and end its participation in the BMFC, the only window that was left open were the occasional talks between Mauritius and British Prime Ministers and their Foreign Ministers. So when the Prime Minister met Gordon Brown at the last Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, he took up the Chagos issue, particularly the British project of proclaiming a Marine Protected Area in the Archipelago.

On his return to Mauritius, the Prime Minister enthusiastically informed the nation that Gordon Brown, after discussions with him, had agreed to ‘put on hold’ the coming into force of the ‘Marine Protected Area’. As I watched the Prime Minister’s statement on television, I asked myself “How can one believe that Gordon Brown would take such an important decision on a sensitive issue like Chagos within a few minutes and in the absence of a proper brief from his Foreign Minister?” Instead of a hasty public statement, he should have been advised to write to Gordon Brown immediately after his return to record their conversations for proper action.

I was therefore not surprised when I heard that the present British Government decided to go ahead with the proclamation of the Marine Protected Area in the Chagos Archipelago. It is clear that in British politics when fundamental issues are involved, both the Government and the Opposition look in the same direction. In fact, this squares with their long term strategy. As far back as 1991, a 200 nautical mile Fisheries Conservation and Management Zone (FCMZ) was declared by the British in the Chagos Archipelago. A private consultancy firm of international repute ‘MRAG Ltd’ has been responsible to the BIOT for sustainable management of the fisheries within the zone. MRAG manages and operates a complete monitoring control and surveillance programme on behalf of BIOT. One can therefore imagine the wealth of technical information on the marine resources of Chagos Archipelago which the British has obtained over the years.

We are confronting two great nations, US and Britain which have forged strong strategic alliances in many fields. Both have years of diplomacy in their stomach as they have been dealing with highly sensitive and complex issues for decades and have come up with formidable solutions with their army of seasoned diplomats, academicians, military chiefs and senior public officers. We need therefore to reflect very carefully about our long-term strategy. Too often our politicians have played the game openly and made public statements on our intentions which have been instantly transmitted to London and Washington by their diplomatic missions here. This has allowed our opponents to read all our cards and find immediate counter arguments.

What do we do now? After listening to the views recently expressed by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the former President Cassam Uteem, Jean Claude de L’Estrac, Anil Gayan, Vijay Makhan, Olivier Bancoult and others, I think a new momentum has been created and there is a strong resolve for a concerted action.

The Government has the responsibility to take a decisive leading role to coordinate the views of the different stakeholders and strategize. Who will coordinate? The best choice will be the Minister of Foreign Affairs himself. I suggest that the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition should seize this momentum, meet early and devise a modus operandi to ensure that regular consultations with those who will be called upon to strategize take place within the parameters of confidentiality.

Building confidence and trust in the consultations will enable us to evolve a sustainable strategy on Chagos in the best interests of Mauritius. To use a favourite expression of Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, “this is a tall order” but I believe it a realisable one.