Farage Blasts Labour’s Chagos Deal as “Worst in History” After Trump Steps In

Summary: Nigel Farage has branded Labour’s proposed Chagos settlement “the worst deal by a British government in history”, after Donald Trump publicly slammed the plan on Truth Social as “an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”. Farage says the agreement would hand sovereignty to Mauritius, saddle UK taxpayers with huge costs, and weaken British sovereignty and the US-UK security partnership at Diego Garcia.

Farage: Trump “vetoed” Labour’s Chagos plan

Nigel Farage has seized on Donald Trump’s intervention in the Chagos row, arguing it took an American president to drag Labour back towards Britain’s national interest.

In a fresh broadside at Keir Starmer’s Government, Farage said Labour’s approach exposed a mindset that treats sovereignty as negotiable and Britain’s security as an afterthought.

“Chagos may be the worst deal by a British government in history.”

Trump called the deal “an act of GREAT STUPIDITY”.

What Labour is accused of offering Mauritius

Farage’s core charge is simple: Labour would hand Chagos sovereignty to Mauritius, then lease back Diego Garcia, the strategically critical military base used by the UK and the US.

He claims the proposal would lock Britain into paying “billions” for the privilege of continuing to operate in territory the UK currently controls.

“Labour’s deal would hand over Chagos’s sovereignty to Mauritius.”

Farage also argues the issue was never put to voters in an election manifesto, framing it as a major foreign policy decision being made without public consent.

International law row: “advisory, not binding”

A major part of Farage’s argument is that Labour officials leaned heavily on international legal pressure as justification for surrendering sovereignty.

But he says Washington has now accepted the key point: the International Court of Justice position cited by Labour was not binding in the way ministers implied.

“They have now realised that the ICJ court judgment cited by Labour was merely advisory, not binding.”

To critics of the UK’s post-Brexit independence, this is the familiar pattern: outsource political decisions to international bodies, then claim there was “no choice”.

Diego Garcia, defence, and the special relationship

Farage is pitching Chagos as a hard-security story, not a legal technicality. He says Diego Garcia is a cornerstone of Western military reach, and that Britain’s role in supporting the base is a serious contribution to the alliance with the US.

He claims senior figures in Washington view the base as uniquely important for overseas operations.

“From the very beginning, I have impressed upon the US administration that it is not in our national interest or theirs.”

For a plain-English explainer of why this archipelago matters to Britain’s security posture, read: Why Chagos Islands matter for UK defence.

Chagossians and self-determination claims

Farage argues the human rights rhetoric around the deal is backwards, claiming the Chagossians have been treated unfairly for decades and should be enabled to return and rebuild their lives.

He also accuses Labour’s legalistic worldview of ignoring the principle of self-determination while insisting “international law must trump British sovereignty”.

“It is deeply ironic that a Labour government dominated by human rights lawyers… appears to have completely ignored… the right of people to self-determination.”

Political hit: Farage says Labour cannot defend the national interest

Back in Westminster, Farage’s conclusion is blunt: Labour does not think in terms of national interest, and the Chagos saga proves it.

He says Britain was only “fortunate” this time because Labour’s move also collided with American interests, prompting Trump’s public intervention.

“This shameful episode should teach us once and for all that the Labour Government is incapable of defending Britain’s national interest.”

The immediate political question is whether Labour now presses ahead, pauses, or quietly backs away. Farage is betting that, once Washington has drawn a line, the deal cannot survive in its current form.