Abstract
What made Diego Garcia so exceptionally attractive for military planners was a combination of its strategic location, isolation, and geophysical-meteorological features such as the relative scarcity of tropical storms.1 There was a catch, though: unlike some other Indian Ocean atolls, the island had a human population—indeed settled for well over a century.2 It is undisputed that at the time of the creation of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) in 1965, there were more than 1,500 people living on Diego Garcia and some of the other Chagos islands. While some of the inhabitants had migrated from Mauritius and the Seychelles as temporary workers with the copra plantations, a considerable number of indigenous families had their roots on Diego Garcia going back four or five generations, as evidenced by the tombstones preserved in the island cemetery.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
P. Leymarie, “Grandes manoeuvres dans l’Océan Indien: la base de Diego-Garcia, sur la route des pétroliers et des cargos,” Le Monde Diplomatique vol. 23 (December 1976) p. 19
On the history of slavery in Diego Garcia, see Vine (Chapter 1, note 6) pp. 60–69, and D. Taylor, “Slavery in the Chagos Archipelago,” Chagos News No. 14 (2000) pp. 2–4.
I owe this information to my colleague, veteran Diego Garcia “wizard” Steven J. Forsberg (Chapter 3, note 36), who is currently at work on a historical study of the topic. See also G. Powell, The Kandyan Wars: The British Army in Ceylon 1803–1818 (plLondon: Cooper 1973) pp. 148
S. de Silva Jayasuriya, “Trading on a Thalassic Network: African Migrations Across the Indian Ocean,” International Social Science Journal vol. 58 (2006) pp. 215–225
C. Pridham, England’s Colonial Empire: Mauritius and its Dependencies (plLondon: Elder, Smith & Co. 1846) p. 403
As quoted by Laws L.J., ibid., who labeled these documents “embarrassing or worse” (at p. 1106). The minute of August 24, 1966, was signed by the permanent under-secretary’s private secretary, Patrick R.H. (later Sir Patrick) Wright. There is no reference to BIOT in the memoirs of P. Gore-Booth, With Great Truth and Respect (plLondon: Constable 1974).
Adopted at Strasbourg on September 16, 1963 (in force May 2, 1968), and amended on November 1, 1998, 1496 United Nations Treaty Series 263; see J.E.S. Fawcett, The Application of the European Convention on Human Rights (2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon 1987) p. 422. Article 3 of the protocol provides that “(1) no one shall be expelled, by means either of an individual or of a collective measure, from the territory of the State of which he is a national,” and “(2) no one shall be deprived of the right to enter the territory of the State of which he is a national.” Article 12(4) of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (see Chapter 1, notes 62 and 64) similarly declares that “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country”; however, the United Kingdom upon its ratification of the covenant on May 20, 1976, expressly reserved the right not to apply Article 12(4) with regard to immigration laws for its dependent territories. See G. Goodwin-Gill, “The Limits of the Power of Expulsion in Public International Law,” British Yearbook of International Law vol. 47 (1975) pp. 55–156
R. Plender, International Migration Law (2nd edn. Dordrecht: Nijhoff 1988) pp. 133–135
A.W.B. Simpson, Human Rights and the End of Empire: Britain and the Genesis of the European Convention (plOxford: Oxford University Press 2001) at pp. 1097–1098.
M. Curtis, Web of Deceit: Britain’s Role in the World (plLondon: Vintage 2003) p. 421
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, written statement in the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (7 December 2005), 1583-I; British Yearbook of International Law vol. 77 (2006) p. 639.
E.D. Brown, The International Law of the Sea, vol. 1 (plAldershot: Dartmouth 1994) p. 151.
H. Dipla, Le régime juridique des îles dans le droit international de la mer (plParis: Presses Universitaires de France 1994) p. 41
B. Kwiatkowska and A.H.A. Soons, “Entitlement to Maritime Areas of Rocks Which Cannot Sustain Human Habitation or Economic Life of Their Own,” Netherlands Yearbook of International Law vol. 21 (1990) pp. 139–181.
I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (3rd edn. Oxford: Clarendon 1979) p. 230
D. Stummel, “Rockall,” in R. Bernhardt (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law vol. 4 (plAmsterdam: Elsevier 2000) pp. 265–266.
See D. Snoxell, “Expulsion from Chagos: Regaining Paradise,” Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History vol. 36 (2008) pp. 119–129
Copyright information
© 2009 Peter H. Sand
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sand, P.H. (2009). Human Rights: How to Depopulate an Island. In: United States and Britain in Diego Garcia. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230622968_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230622968_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38028-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-62296-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)