In 2002 I was somewhat surprised to be asked to be an observer for the Gibraltar referendum that the then Labour government had urged as part of ongoing efforts to be eventually shot of the Rock (and during which Gibraltarians voted by 17,900 to 187 to remain a UK overseas territory). Arriving, and sharing similar views to Simon Jenkins (Britain needs to abandon its delusions of empire – giving up the Chagos Islands is a good start, 8 October), I was swiftly disabused of them by the Gibraltarians, who tended to react badly to Spanish bullying, as they still do now. The same could be said of the Falkland Islands, which Argentina thought could be taken by force after Margaret Thatcher, demonstrating a lack of interest in the islands, downgraded the British passports of the islanders. The Chagos Islands are a different matter. The islanders were deported against their will by a Labour government, with Lord Chalfont making Mauritian independence conditional on the islands being detached from the then crown colony, and the island of Diego Garcia being made a US military base. Under the new agreement, Britain can no longer block the return of those who wish to do so and has set up a fund to enable them to do so. In an ideal world, since self-determination is as important to the Gibraltarians as it is the Chagossians, Britain would have organised a referendum for them as well. However, since all British governments tend to march in step with the US state department, the idea that the government would put the interest of the Chagossians ahead of the US military on Diego Garcia is for the birds. Mark Seddon Hereford Simon Jenkins falls into the same trap as the UN decolonisation committee, prioritising the value and possession of land and sea in conjunction with proximity over any rights of self-determination of peoples (a contradiction that the UN has never resolved), whether they be Chagossians, Falkland Islanders, Gibraltarians, Channel Islanders and many others around the world. Following his logic ad absurdam: Ireland is offshore from us and should therefore be part of Great Britain; we lie just offshore from France, so surely we should submit to France. Does he also support the transfer of Taiwan to a country that has only ever briefly possessed it over the wishes of the majority of its population? And let’s not even mention Russia’s justification for the war in Ukraine. If Simon Jenkins thinks there is a minimum price for self-determination, perhaps he might wish to share it with those affected by his arguments? Dr Robert Read Lancaster University Simon Jenkins calls our overseas territories “delusions of empire” and demands their abolition. Why is there no similar call for France to abandon its own extensive overseas territories, from thousands of Polynesian islands to French Guiana? He thinks it ridiculous that Gibraltar can be allowed to “sour relations with Spain”, but in Ceuta and Melilla, Spain owns the only remaining European colonies on the African continent. Why is Spain’s hypocrisy not challenged? Jenkins also ignores the fact that Argentina continues to occupy Patagonia, a territory it invaded in the 1880s while enslaving and dispossessing the Mapuche people. Robert Frazer Salford, Greater Manchester The Mauritius-Britain agreement on the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands was announced on the third anniversary of the detainment of 60 Sri Lankan Tamils on Diego Garcia. The oppressive regime governing their desperate existence since their unintentional arrival could be eased if all parties concerned agreed to move the asylum seekers to an adjacent island, maybe Peros Banhos, where the opportunity to improve their quality of life would improve immeasurably. The extended legal and diplomatic processes will probably grind on for some time. This simple humanitarian gesture would start to convince observers that the corner has been turned in this dark episode of British history. Vince Thompson Editor, The St Helena Independent