Chagos deal row deepens over Iran strike dispute

Published: 20 February 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Donald Trump has reignited controversy over the Chagos deal after a dramatic policy reversal. The Chagos deal, already politically sensitive in Westminster and Washington, now faces fresh uncertainty. Reports suggest the former US president withdrew support after Britain resisted allowing strikes on Iran from Diego Garcia.

The disagreement centres on the future of the Chagos Islands and their strategic importance. Under proposals agreed by the UK government, sovereignty would transfer to Mauritius. In return, Britain and the United States would retain long term access to the military base on Diego Garcia. The base remains one of the most critical Western assets in the Indian Ocean.

Earlier this month, Trump described the agreement as the best outcome available to Britain. That assessment shifted abruptly following internal discussions over Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Posting on his platform Truth Social, Trump criticised Sir Keir Starmer’s approach. He argued Britain was making a grave mistake by advancing the Chagos deal without considering regional threats.

Trump directly linked the issue to potential American military action against Tehran. He suggested that if diplomacy failed, US forces might require access to Diego Garcia. He also mentioned RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire as another possible staging point. Fairford hosts US strategic bombers under longstanding bilateral defence arrangements.

British officials insist that any use of UK territory for offensive action must comply with international law. Under established procedures, operations launched from British soil require explicit government consent. Legal advisers in Whitehall are understood to consider a pre-emptive strike highly problematic. Such action would likely clash with Britain’s interpretation of international law principles.

The Chagos deal was negotiated after years of diplomatic dispute. The islands were separated from Mauritius in 1965 before independence. In 2019, the International Court of Justice advised that Britain should end its administration. The United Nations General Assembly later backed that advisory opinion.

Successive British governments resisted immediate change but opened talks with Port Louis. Negotiations accelerated under the current Labour administration. Supporters argue the arrangement protects security interests while addressing historic grievances. Critics warn it risks weakening Britain’s strategic leverage in a volatile region.

Diego Garcia remains central to global defence planning. The atoll has supported operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has also provided logistical backing for missions across the Middle East. Its runway and deep-water facilities allow rapid deployment of heavy aircraft and naval vessels.

The US State Department has signalled cautious support for the framework agreement. Officials believe continued access would safeguard American operational flexibility. However, Trump’s renewed objections have complicated diplomatic messaging. His intervention has emboldened opponents of the Chagos deal within Westminster.

Conservative figures have urged Washington to reconsider its endorsement. Shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel is expected to raise the matter in Washington. She has described the agreement as unworkable without firm American backing. Downing Street insists that discussions with allies remain constructive and ongoing.

Ben Judah, a former adviser to Foreign Secretary David Lammy, warned the path ahead looks uncertain. He suggested parliamentary timing could prove decisive in the coming weeks. The enabling legislation is due to return to the House of Lords shortly. Delays earlier this year reflected uncertainty over the US political climate.

If the bill fails to pass before the parliamentary session ends in May, it must restart. That prospect raises concerns about diplomatic credibility and legislative fatigue. Ministers hope momentum can be regained before procedural deadlines intervene. Behind closed doors, officials continue to brief American counterparts on legal constraints.

The broader geopolitical backdrop is increasingly tense. Western governments remain wary of Iran’s nuclear programme. Tehran insists its activities are peaceful and civilian in purpose. Intelligence assessments differ on how close Iran stands to weaponisation capacity.

Trump’s remarks have amplified speculation about possible US military planning. Analysts caution that public statements do not always reflect operational intent. Nevertheless, the linkage between Iran policy and the Chagos deal is unmistakable. It underscores how regional flashpoints influence seemingly separate diplomatic tracks.

Sir Keir Starmer has not publicly responded to Trump’s latest criticism. A recent phone conversation between the two leaders covered Iran but omitted public reference to the islands. Officials describe the call as constructive and forward looking. They emphasise shared objectives on regional stability and non-proliferation.

Mauritius has watched developments closely and with measured concern. Its government views sovereignty restoration as a matter of justice. Leaders in Port Louis have maintained that security cooperation would continue seamlessly. They stress that long-term leasing arrangements protect allied military interests.

For many Chagossians displaced decades ago, the debate carries personal weight. Campaigners have long sought recognition of their right to return. The proposed agreement includes commitments on resettlement and compensation funding. Human rights groups argue these provisions are long overdue.

Security experts note that Diego Garcia’s legal status under Mauritian sovereignty would still allow allied basing. Comparable arrangements exist worldwide through lease agreements. The practical impact on day-to-day operations may therefore prove limited. Yet symbolism and strategic signalling matter profoundly in international politics.

Within Parliament, divisions remain sharp but not entirely partisan. Some Labour backbenchers have expressed unease about security implications. Several Conservative peers have raised constitutional questions about treaty obligations. Crossbench voices in the Lords are likely to scrutinise defence clauses closely.

Diplomats caution that the Chagos deal cannot be viewed in isolation. Britain’s wider Indo-Pacific strategy depends on stable regional partnerships. Relations with India, Australia, and Gulf states intersect with this debate. Any perception of weakened resolve could reverberate beyond the Indian Ocean.

At the same time, government lawyers remain firm on operational constraints. They argue that adherence to international law strengthens Britain’s global standing. Authorising a pre-emptive strike without clear legal basis would risk reputational damage. Such concerns appear central to the present impasse.

Observers in Washington suggest Trump’s stance may yet evolve again. His earlier endorsement surprised many seasoned officials. Political calculations during an election year may influence tone and timing. For now, uncertainty clouds the legislative calendar in Westminster.

The coming weeks will test diplomatic agility on both sides of the Atlantic. Ministers must balance alliance management with legal principle. They also face mounting domestic scrutiny over strategic priorities. Whether the Chagos deal survives intact remains uncertain.

What is clear is that the islands’ future resonates far beyond their shores. Decisions taken in London and Washington will shape regional dynamics. They will also signal how democratic allies navigate contested security dilemmas. As debate intensifies, careful diplomacy will prove essential.

Check our latest news