Should Britain Be Giving Up Its Overseas Territories?

Some argue that the UK should cede its overseas territories to better comply with international law, allow local populations to decide who should rule them, and enhance its diplomatic prospects.

International Law – As one of the democracies that has led the creation of international law, the UK should naturally comply with its guidelines. So, when the International Court of Justice recognised Chagossian sovereignty, the UK had to show its compliance with international law. Recognising that holding sovereignty over the islands was illegitimate, Britain re-established itself at the heart of a rules-based international order. 

Britain can enhance its democraticc values and diplomatic image

Self-determination – If the UK follows the democratic values in the Commonwealth Charter, it should allow the right of people to govern themselves. This need for self-determination of people has been vital for local populations asking for independence from the UK. Yet the UK has not always complied with such demands. Gibraltar, for instance, voted overwhelmingly (95%) to remain in the European Union yet remains under British rule.

Diplomacy –Diplomatic leverage on the international stage is important. When Britain withdrew from its former colonies, it marked a shift towards fruitful relations in the substitutive Commonwealth. Therefore, using its power to improve its diplomatic image and relations, the UK could further expand its sphere of international allies. Reaching a settlement with Argentina over the Falklands and Spain over Gibraltar may help to expand Britain’s sphere of influence.

However, others contest that the UK has not been ready to give up all of its overseas territories. This unwillingness can be seen in the limits of British compliance with international law, the military benefit of overseas territories and some local populations approving British rule. 

Limits of international law – While the UK is influential in dictating and following international law, it does not always abide it. When its national practices and interests are under concern, it can sometimes be unstrategic for the UK to apply international law. Britain’s previous foreign secretary, Lord Cameron, rejected the international court's demands. This rejection was on the grounds of violating a 1965 agreement granting the UK rights over the islands. So, following international lawfare would have damaged British interests by establishing unfair legal precedents.

Overseas territories can serve to protect the UK’s foreign interests

Geostrategy – Overseas territories can serve to protect the UK’s foreign interests. The Diego Garcia military base in the Chagos Archipelago is a crucial example, protecting UK-US interests in the Indian Ocean. Although Keir Starmer was able to procure a 99-year lease for its use, the use of the military base will not be the same as it is under Mauritius sovereignty.

Interests of citizens – Sometimes, overseas territories would like to stay with the UK. Despite Argentina’s persistent legal claim to the Falklands, a 2013 referendum settled the matter among its citizenry, as 99.8% of islanders voted to remain a British Overseas Territory. Many argue that this confers legitimacy on Britain’s sovereignty over those among whom British rule remains popular.