U.S. could use the Chagos Islands to bomb Iran is another good reason why the United Kingdom must be restored in Mauritius
David Cameron met Navin Ramgoolam, Prime Minister of Mauritius, at the moment. Apparently, they discussed what Robin Cook called it "one of the most sordid and morally indefensible" episodes of our colonial history of the war, namely misleading treatment of the Chagossians. Ramgoolam told a Guardian reporter that the meeting was "very cordial", then maybe there is hope now Britain has finally mitigate her complicity in international crimes - that is, the use of Diego Garcia in the torture and refunds - and prevent any involvement in the UK if the U.S. uses it to launch an attack against Iran in the future. The Chagos Archipelago must be returned to its rightful owner.
that the owner is in Mauritius, including Chagos Islands were still a part, ceded to Britain by France in the Treaty of 1814 in Paris. When ordering by the UN decolonization in the 1960s, which came with the requirement of international law as a whole colonial territory should be granted independence. However, the United States wanted the islands to a database of the cold war and secretly offered the Wilson administration with a Polaris missile off if Chagos from Mauritius is removed and disposed of the Chagossians.
BritainSo he lied to the United Nations, pretending that there was no permanent inhabitants on the islands - the Chagossians 2000, settled there for almost 200 years, have been described as "mobile workers". Then claim ownership of the archipelago, Britain deported to Mauritius and leased the islands to the United States until 2016, allowing the construction of a naval base in the largest, Diego Garcia. Therefore, this contract - that the UK has no income - will renew
The first problem is that the UK can not have the Chagos Archipelago: an international tribunal would be likely that this hotel has been taken illegally in Mauritius. Although Maurice wants his application considered, the UK refuses to arbitrate, and excluded the use of the International Court of Justice. Successive governments in the UK say they are confident they have sovereignty, but they are afraid that the question of authority, he decided.
Then there is the solemn promise Mauritius became independent, the Chagos would "turn" or "returned" to Mauritius in 50 years, if they are no longer necessary for the purposes of defense of the Organization of the United Kingdom. The UK does not need to design to occupy the Chagos islands, in their own defense and Diego Garcia is only for the strategic interest of the United States - Allows start of the 2003 bombing in Baghdad and is the nearest base if the U.S. decides to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. The possibility that it would be a good reason for the United Kingdom to any liability of Diego Garcia. This island was used as a transit country to torture. It is generally accepted that U.S. warships docked there was a place for waterboarding of suspected terrorists. In 2008, then Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, was forced to admit in Parliament (which had previously been denied) that the base was used at least twice by the Americans to travel illegal. Even this recognition, however, was incomplete: it is now clear from documents found on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Libya that MI6 to arrange a dissident anti-Gaddafi, who "translated" by Diego Garcia torture in Tripoli in 2004. This means that the UK has not only turned a blind eye to the illegal use of the island by the United States. On the right is as guilty as any owner who knowingly allow their premises to be used for criminal purposes by the tenant -. Especially when you join the crime
- If it is not moral enough to deprive the United Kingdom to take to Chagos, there is a decision later this month by the European Court of Human Rights, which may require to allow Chagossians to return. They succeeded in its request for assistance in the High Court (two judges) and the Court of Appeal (three judges), but lost two to three Lords. There is a reasonable chance that you will win in the European court, which imposes an obligation on Britain to facilitate their return to the islands. The UK can not fulfill this obligation, while the U.S. refuses to allow the Chagossians to return and live in their own homes.
- Cameron can cut this Gordian knot agrees that sovereignty over the archipelago from now must be based in Mauritius, its rightful owner, and where most of the Chagossians still live. Mauritius is a modern democracy has nothing to do with torture, and even the U.S., no doubt, to convince the grant of a lease on the naval base, there would be safeguards against the use of new payments, and a significant income that could support the return of the Chagossians in other islands of the group at least. The UK has always been unworthy to hold the territory. Do you really want to give our permission to use the tenants if they decide to bomb Qom?
- . Geoffrey Robertson QC
- full legal notice on the Chagos issue is found in Volume 36, No. 1, University of Western Australia Law Review (June 2012). View:
Find best price for : --Britain----Robertson----Geoffrey----David----Navin----Cameron----Chagos--
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(407)
-
▼
August
(15)
- Contraception, healthcare and the costs women will...
- I wish my mother had aborted me | Lynn Beisner
- Why the Chinese community is a dead cert for bookies
- Pop music and crosswords: tools for council public...
- Unpaid work schemes ruled lawful as high court rej...
- Euro 2012: Steven Gerrard is relishing his England...
- Britain must end its sordid treatment of the Chago...
- New Jersey Muslims sue to protect their rights fro...
- Eurozone crisis live: Spain passes bond auction te...
- University guide 2013: University of Sunderland
- Making public service staff into brand ambassadors
- Is your job finished when the A levels are over?
- Applying to university - fees and living costs fun...
- Round up: boosting morale on a budget
- Teacher Network newsletter: Microsoft, Amnesty and...
-
▼
August
(15)
0 comments:
Post a Comment