OPINION:
Abrego Garcia and Diego Garcia are two very different problems.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the “Maryland man,” is a speed bump on the road to deporting illegal alien criminals. Diego Garcia is a joint U.S.-British base in the Indian Ocean, over which uber-liberal British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has foolishly given sovereignty to Mauritius, a nation with close political ties to China.
Mr. Abrego Garcia was wrongly deported and brought back to the U.S. He is now in pretrial custody for alleged crimes, including human trafficking. The latest is that his attorneys want the court to continue his jail time so he will not be deported before his trial.
Why should we care that Mr. Abrego Garcia is given far more media attention than Diego Garcia? We should care because of the base’s enormous strategic value.
Diego Garcia is in the Chagos Archipelago, almost at the center of the Indian Ocean and below the equator. It may be the most remote base we have. We have deployed F-15s, B-52s, KC-135 tankers and C-5 heavy transports (aka the “aluminum overcast”) to Diego Garcia, along with the personnel to fly, fight and otherwise support the aircraft. (I’m told that being stationed there is a lot like being stationed at Guam, but without the “attractions” that Guam provides.)
Why such a heavy deployment to such a remote base?
I asked my friend, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, about Diego Garcia’s strategic value. He is a real warrior and thinks deeply about strategic matters.
He told me, “Diego Garcia holds critical strategic importance due to its geographic location, operational capabilities and political uniqueness. … Specifically, its value lies in unimpeded U.S. access, power projection reach, logistical depth, and survivability. … It serves as a linchpin for American power projection, deterrence and logistical support with access to the Indo-Pacific, Middle East and East Africa.”
In sum, Gen. Deptula said, “In an era defined by long-range precision strike and contested domains, Diego Garcia remains one of the most indispensable pieces of U.S. global force posture — a crown jewel of American air and sea basing.”
In 1968, Britain purchased the islands, which included the base, from Mauritius, a nation to the south and close to Madagascar. Mauritius argued that it had illegally been forced to surrender the islands to Britain as a condition of gaining independence. Mr. Starmer, ever the anti-colonialist, went along and leased back the base for 99 years.
Under Mr. Starmer’s deal, Mauritius obtained sovereignty over the base while Britain rented it back for 101 million pounds per year. Whether Britain can afford those payments is, at best, questionable. British Conservatives blasted the deal as a self-inflicted wound. The U.S. interests in the base and in the region are also wounded.
The deal supposedly sets up a 24-mile exclusion zone around the base where no building is permitted. That’s a sorry joke, considering how long it would take for a missile to fly that distance and how sensitive spy equipment is at greater distances. There is no prohibition in the deal for China to establish a military base just beyond the 24-mile boundary. We also have to consider how close China and Mauritius are.
China and Mauritius have a free trade agreement and a currency swap agreement. China is looking forward to Mauritius joining its Belt and Road Initiative, which would enable it to build naval bases, including missile installations, in Mauritius and on the Chagos Islands.
If war breaks out with China, which is entirely possible given China’s announced intent to take Taiwan by force, aircraft from Diego Garcia can reach supply ships going to China, particularly the oil tankers that supply China with desperately needed oil.
In short, Diego Garcia provides us with a vital base from which we can fight to defend our interests in the Middle East and China. That’s a heavy strategic responsibility for one base to handle. Mauritius’ strong connections to China undermine that strategic value. When, not if, Mauritius joins China’s Belt and Road Initiative, China will be able to build bases nearby that will obviously threaten Diego Garcia.
President Trump has supported Mr. Starmer in his deal with Mauritius, saying he was “inclined to go along with your country” on it, noting the importance of the 99-year lease. The Trump administration has reportedly conducted a review and determined that the agreement secures the long-term operation of the Diego Garcia base. That determination was entirely wrong.
Diego Garcia is too important for us to allow Chinese influence to limit its value and, eventually, amass forces around it.
Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should conduct another review of the value of Diego Garcia, recasting their thinking to focus on the Chinese influence over Mauritius. We cannot afford to lose Diego Garcia to China.
• Jed Babbin is a national security and foreign affairs columnist for The Washington Times and a contributing editor for The American Spectator.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.