Len,

>I don't think the US leases any base in Diego Garcia. It's a British
>base on which the US has troops.

I think it's actually slightly more complicated. I don't believe there's
any lease as such, but a 50-year agreement (starting from 1966) that the US
can use Diego Garcia for 'defence purposes'. This agreement extended to
re-locating all the existing inhabitants to Mauritius.

The island remains under the jurisdiction of a British Administrator, but
it's my understanding that he exercises little real control over the US
facilities on the western side of the atoll. He's mostly responsible for
areas of the island where there is no military presence (e.g. the 'nature
reserve' on the eastern side of the atoll) and the outlying islands.

Another point to note is that whilst the UK High Court ruled in 2000 that
the re-located Chagos Islanders should be allowed to return to the
territory, this has reputedly been blocked by the US under the terms of the
agreement.

The base on Diego Garcia is often described as a UK-US facility, but the
reality is that everything was built by the US military, and there are less
than 50 British personnel compared to more than 3,000 US personnel. The US
does not make any payment for use of the island, but a former colleague of
mine (who provides communications to the territory) told me that there is
an agreement (maybe unwritten) that British contractors are allowed to
supply the US forces.

Regards,

Kevin Meynell