Keir Starmer's word is once again on the line, this time over the very people he told Britain were lined up against his Chagos surrender. The Prime Minister assured the public that “Russia, China, Iran” all stood opposed to the agreement. China's own ambassador has since hailed it as a diplomatic triumph.
Speaking to journalists last week, Starmer drew a sharp line between supporters and opponents of the treaty:
“It is worth reminding ourselves who is in favour of this treaty, this deal, and who's against it. In favour are all of our allies: the US, NATO, Five Eyes, India. Against it: Russia, China, Iran and, surprisingly, the leader of the opposition and Nigel Farage are in that column alongside Russia, China and Iran.”
That account is now falling apart under scrutiny. Far from condemning the deal, the Chinese Ambassador to Mauritius, Huang Shifang, warmly applauded it, extended “massive congratulations” and called China “a trustworthy friend of Mauritius”. The respected local newspaper Le Mauricien reported that Chinese diplomats celebrated the Chagos deal as an “historical achievement” and praised Mauritius's “quest to support territorial integrity”.
Carried under the headline “Diplomatie et relations bilatérales – Deal Chagos: ‘Massive congratulation’”, the report leaves no room for spin. The ambassador's words flatly contradict the Prime Minister's public claim of Chinese opposition.
For us this goes well beyond a single misstatement — it raises pointed questions about Starmer's honesty, his judgement, and what else the public is not being told. The criticism came fast. Conservative peer Lord Ross Kempsell did not mince words:
“All opposition must get serious – this is easy stuff.”
Writing on social media, Lord Kempsell set out the contradiction plainly: that Starmer had been “caught in a brazen lie”, having claimed “Russia, China, Iran” opposed his Chagos deal, when in fact “the Chinese ambassador in Mauritius welcomes it and offers ‘massive congratulations’”. The Prime Minister, he insisted, “must retract this claim”.
Across the political divide, Starmer's opponents are voicing astonishment at what looks to them like a calculated effort to twist the geopolitical picture and bulldoze through a bitterly contested deal.
What the Chagos deal actually does
Under the agreement, the UK hands sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius while leasing back the Diego Garcia military base for £101 million a year. The arrangement has already set off alarm bells the length of Westminster. Detractors warn that it erodes Britain's standing in the world, signs away British territory, and gifts China a propaganda victory.
The cost is staggering. Beyond surrendering the territory itself, Starmer has tied the British taxpayer to £3.4 billion across a 99-year lease — a figure that could climb towards £30 billion once inflation is factored in. Hundreds of millions more are set aside on top of that for so-called “economic development” and resettlement schemes.
And yet the Chagossians themselves — the community this deal is supposedly meant to serve — have stated plainly that they want to stay British. Many feel betrayed and brushed aside. They have gone so far as to threaten legal action against the Labour government, calling the agreement a “disgrace” and denouncing the total absence of consultation.
Only last week, two Chagossians took the deal to the High Court and brought it to a halt. The reprieve was short-lived: the judge swiftly ruled in Starmer's favour. With no further scrutiny, no reference to Parliament, and no vote put to the British public over giving up sovereign territory, Starmer signed on the spot.
The result has been a wave of public anger — driven not only by the eye-watering price tag but by what critics describe as a basic betrayal of the national interest and of democratic process.
Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, has condemned the deal as “wrong-headed, wasteful, and dangerous”, warning that it damages Britain's strategic interests and hands leverage to our adversaries.
Starmer has serious explaining to do
One thing is no longer in dispute: either Keir Starmer was unaware of the facts, or he knowingly misled the public. Neither is reassuring.
A growing number of MPs are now calling on Starmer to withdraw his claim and account for it fully before Parliament. Pressure is building for the Government to suspend ratification of the deal until it has been properly examined.
With public faith in politicians already worn thin, the Prime Minister's careless handling of so weighty a diplomatic question is setting off warnings on every side. At best it was a sloppy misrepresentation; at worst, a plain lie. Whichever it is, Starmer owes the country an explanation.
Sign the petition to Save Chagos here.