Chagos Reclaiming an archipelago Resettlement has long been an objective of Chagossian Seychellois. A soon to be published study aims to show just how feasible such an option would be. By NR At the end of this month, the global professional services firm KPMG is expected to submit the final version of its feasibility study for the resettlement of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), an area more commonly known as the Chagos. The report, which was commissioned by the administration of the BIOT in March 2014, aims to determine the cost, feasibility and environmental implications of resettlement. On January 10, KPMG presented some of its findings to members of the local Chagossian community who participated last year in the consultation process that helped inform the study. But as Gracia Fideria of the Chagossians Committee Seychelles told this newspaper, the chances that this report will lead to anything concrete are very slim indeed, at least if past experience is anything to go by. “It’s not the first time a study of this kind is being undertaken. And the way this one was presented, well, we don’t feel that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel. There are always so many excuses”, she said. Indeed, according to the KPMG’s draft report which was published in November 2014, a 2000 study commissioned by the UK government concluded that, “any long-term resettlement would be precarious and costly”. According to Mrs Fideria, there are around 250 Chagossian Seychellois, a figure which grows considerably when one takes their descendants into consideration. She affirms that resettlement enjoys overwhelming support locally, on condition that returnees do not have to sacrifice their current living standards. This was confirmed by KPMG’s draft report, which stated that, “all attendees at consultations at all locations [Ed’s note, consultations were held in Mauritius, Seychelles, Manchester, Crawley and London] expressed a preference for returning to BIOT permanently. It was clear that temporary visits to BIOT is not an acceptable option for the Chagossians. It was clear that the Chagossian community expect a standard of living similar to that of an average UK citizen. The community expects to have access to similar infrastructure to that currently on Diego Garcia”. This includes a similar level of education and healthcare as in the UK, housing, jobs and pensions (attendees expressed a “strong preference towards fishing” but were also open opportunities in high-end tourism). Considering that Diego Garcia, which houses one of the biggest American military bases outside of the US, is the only inhabited island, such expectations might seem unreasonably high, unfeasible even. But as the UK Chagos Support Association has pointed out in an online discussion about the study, this impression might not be the fruit of the happenstance: “The KPMG report speaks quite vaguely in terms of ‘modern’ and ‘adequate’ living standards. It is unsurprising that faced with such a binary choice, most Chagossians stated a preference for ‘modern’. Similarly, comparisons between UK and Mauritius standards have been unhelpful as neither would be entirely transferable to resettled islands”. Be that as it may, KPMG came forward with three main resettlement options: large-scale, medium-scale and small-scale resettlement for 1 500, 500 and 150 people, respectively. The first option would require “infrastructure development on both Diego Garcia and the outer islands”, while under the second option re-settlers would be to earn living by working in marine conservation, fishing or at the US military base. For its part, the third option would require “limited investment in infrastructure and facilities, like on Diego Garcia”. Naturally all this will come at a cost. The infrastructure capital cost estimate for the first option is around SCR.7.8 billion (including an international airport and a harbour); for the second it’s SCR1.98 billion and the third option will put UK taxpayer’s back SCR1.15 billion. Interestingly, on a per head basis, number two is the cheapest option. This emphasis on Diego Garcia comes as something of a surprise as the island has always been strictly off-limits due to the presence of the military facility. For as the study stresses, a 1966 treaty between the US and UK stipulated that there would no permanent population on the island. And even though the base’s lease is up for renewal, this change of mind from the part of the US government appears to be a novel development. Encouragingly, the report notes that, “there are no insurmountable legal obstacles that would prevent a resettlement on BIOT”, even if certain changes will have to be brought to the treaty. The feasibility study also explores some of the complex legal and constitutional issues that resettlement will create. For example, would Chagossians returning to the archipelago have to be issued with BIOT citizenship? Who will oversee the drafting of a new constitution for the BIOT? And how will land be allocated to the returning Chagossians? The report also undertakes an environmental analysis of the archipelago, including the health of its coral reefs, the environmental sustainability of resettlement and the implications of sea-level rise and coastal erosion (which were presented major obstacles in the previous feasibility study). The carrying capacities of the three main islands – Diego Garcia, Ile du Coin (Peros Banhos) and Boddam (Salomon) – are evaluated in terms of rainfall, soil agro-forestry potential, coral reef fish abundance, etc. Unsurprisingly, large-scale resettlement will have the biggest impact. “In general, completely undeveloped remote islands are rather hostile environments, and requiring significant infrastructures and facilities to make them ‘habitable and hospitable’. These inevitably carry extremely high environmental as well as financial costs. This is consistent with the relative fragility of Ile du Coin and Boddam to resettlement impacts, in comparison with Diego Garcia”, the report states. Despite all the work that has undoubtedly gone into the study, those directly concerned by its findings, namely the Chagossians themselves, aren’t holding their breath for resettlement. A case of once bitten, twice shy perhaps. “It’s been done for political purposes. They’re just going to break our hearts again”, Mrs Fideria fears. At any rate, the publication of KPMG’s final feasibility study, which is imminent, will show just how serious the UK government is about resettlement.
Posted on: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 09:04:12 +0000