Britain05 February, 20262 min read
Trump U-Turns and Backs Starmer's Deal to Cede Chagos Islands to Mauritius
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
Trump publicly backed the UK–Mauritius Chagos sovereignty deal and leaseback of Diego Garcia Trump had earlier called the agreement an 'act of great stupidity' before reversing stance
7 outlets told this the same way.
Trump on Chagos deal
Former US president Donald Trump softened his criticism of the UK's agreement to cede the Chagos Islands to Mauritius after a 'very productive' call with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, saying the deal was likely 'the best he could make.' Several outlets reported Trump had earlier blasted the transfer as an 'act of great stupidity,' but he praised the importance of Diego Garcia to US security and signaled he would work with Starmer to implement the agreement. Downing Street said the two leaders agreed on protecting the joint US–UK base and would work closely to implement the deal.
“US president Donald Trump has softened his recent criticism of the UK’s agreement to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, saying after a 'very productive' call with Prime Minister Keir Starmer that the deal was likely 'the best he could make.'”
Diego Garcia sovereignty deal
The core terms reported across outlets are consistent: the UK would cede sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius. Diego Garcia, described as strategically important, would remain a joint US-UK military base under a 99-year lease. Reporting varies on the financial figures: politico.eu says the 99-year lease will cost Britain about £3.4 billion initially.
The Independent frames the plan as costing £35bn over the next century. The Daily Mail reports a lease figure of $47m. Sources repeatedly underline Diego Garcia's strategic centrality to US national security.
Trump on Diego Garcia
Trump repeatedly warned he would reserve the right to 'militarily secure and reinforce' Diego Garcia if the lease collapsed or U.S. operations were threatened, language reported in multiple outlets. He dismissed environmental objections—reported variously as rejecting 'environmental nonsense' or 'environmental' challenges—while praising U.S. military capabilities. Some outlets framed that stance as a security guarantee, while others portrayed it as a potential threat or a dismissal of environmental protections.
“Trump said he reserves the right to 'militarily secure and reinforce' U.S. forces on the atoll if the 99‑year lease — which will cost Britain about £3.4 billion initially — ever collapses or U.S. operations are threatened.”
UK political reaction to deal
The deal prompted visible UK political friction. Politico reports behind-the-scenes lobbying by Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and Tory MP Kemi Badenoch to persuade Trump to oppose the deal. The same report cites Westminster figures such as Peter Mandelson and producer Mark Burnett in back-channel contacts.
Conservative critics including Priti Patel described the agreement in strong terms. The Guardian quotes Patel calling it a 'massive strategic blunder', and Sky reports MPs and peers called it a 'shameful surrender'. Downing Street pushed back on claims of panic, saying diplomatic channels prevailed and ministers will work to implement the agreement.
Chagos bill and Trump comments
Uncertainty remains. Several outlets report that Starmer briefly withdrew the Chagos bill amid the row. The Independent says the bill was temporarily withdrawn and later returned to the House of Lords after Trump's fresh comments.
“After Trump’s latest softening, the bill has been allowed to return to the House of Lords.”
Sky warns Trump might yet reverse position again. Downing Street sources cited in Politico suggested Trump's earlier criticism related to Greenland disputes, indicating diplomatic context behind the public spat. Overall, outlets agree on the key facts but differ on how lasting or stable Trump's change of tone is, and on how consequential the deal's costs and parliamentary fate will be.
