On Wednesday, the House of Commons debated an opposition motion on the government's plans to give away sovereignty of the Chagos Islands and Diego Garcia which host a strategically vital UK-US military base. This is the speech James prepared for the debate although he was not called due to lack of time.
"Let me begin by welcoming the Prime Minister’s announcement that the government will increase defence spending to 2.5% by 2027. While his hand has been forced by events the government has responded and recognises the reality facing the United Kingdom and our allies - and importantly the need for us to step up. Although rather than be straightforward he did not give clear answers at Prime Minister's questions saying a £6 billion increase is actually £13 billion.
Having spent three years as a special adviser in the Ministry of Defence from 2014, when the defence budget began growing again, I recognise the urgent need for more investment in capabilities and personnel to help keep Britain safe at home and overseas. At that time, we began training Ukraine’s Armed Forces and we have stood with them before and since Putin’s invasion because we recognise the important of its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
That is why it is so striking that the government is actively seeking to give away sovereignty of a key strategic asset and the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean – and to pay for doing so.
First there is the principle at stake and the legal position. The ICJ ruling is advisory and non-binding
As Richard Elkins of Policy Exchange has said:
~The UK is under no legal or moral obligation to cede the Chagos Islands to Mauritius and should not be intimidated into doing so, at significant cost to vital strategic interests, by the abuse of the International Court of Justice's advisory jurisdiction".
The minister's response was wholly unpersuaive - unless parties agree for the court to settle a dispute it has no jurisdiction.
So the government has made a choice to strike this deal..
We seem to have a government that believes in the rule of lawyers, not the rule of law.
It is understandable that there are questions about the role of the Attorney General given he had previous involvement in cases related to the Chagos Islands.
There has been a lack of openness by the government. It is unclear whether the government has given away a unilateral right to renew any lease agreement. The Mauritian Prime Minister says it has but ministers are silent.
Then we have had the frankly spurious briefings to justify this surrender including the International Telecommunications Union and what is could supposedly do.
It is a while since I had access to classified briefings but I would point people to the comments of my RHF members for Tonbridge who as security minister certainly has seen advice on Chagos Islands and said this explanation is nonsense.
Strangely enough it is an argument put forward by the Prime Minister’s friend Philippe Sands
The final insult is the amount of money the government is reportedly considering paying. I say reportedly as of course ministers have repeatedly refused to be straightforward with the House and say what the amounts are.
The range is potentially billions of pounds.
While I began by welcoming the commitment to 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence I certainly would oppose any attempt to include this as part of that uplift – it is not buying us any greater capability or increasing the lethality of our armed forces than we have today.
Quite the contrary – it would be diverting spending from defence priorities at a time of serious threats.
And the Prime Minister's refusal to give a straight answer to the Leader of the Opposition suggests that is precisely what the government plans to do.
To conclude, there are still no answers to basic questions:
How much will it cost to lease back a base we own?
Will the UK unilaterally be able to extend a lease?
What protections are there against hostile states who want to get a foothold in the outer islands of the archipelago close to Diego Garcia?
This is a rotten deal.
Bad for our national security and bad for taxpayers.
The government should stop this nonsense."
