undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmmooss1y ago0 comments

AFAIK, the US and UK value Diego Garcia because currently there aren't geographical alternatives for that base. Where else could they put it that would have the same benefits?

0 comments

BurningFrog1y ago

The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable.

To a 1925 (99 years ago) military force, the Diego Garcia airfield would have had zero importance.

throw0101d1y ago

> The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable.

I bet that's what the UK thought about Hong Kong in the late 1800s, but when 1996 rolled around I think they (and many HKers) would have liked a longer-and-99-years lease.

While geography isn't quite destiny, it is fairly important, and having a random rock in a place where there are no other rocks will always be useful IMHO (unless we perhaps develop teleportation).

BobAliceInATree1y ago

in 99 years, most of the island probably will be underwater due to climate change.

vixen991y ago

Further information on 13,000 islands: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2...

"Of over 13,000 islands examined, approximately 12% experienced significant shifts in shoreline positions. The total shoreline length of these islands approaches 200,000 km, with 7.57% showing signs of landward erosion and 6.05% expanding seaward. Human activities, particularly reclamation and land filling, were identified as primary drivers of local shoreline transformations, while natural factors have a comparatively minor impact. "

BurningFrog1y ago

The island is certainly in the risk zone, but I think that is also unknowable.

My guess is that by carbon sequestering and/or SO2 injection in the stratosphere, the climate change will be controllable within a few decades.

skeledrew1y ago

It's very likely that we're already beyond some of the tipping points, and others are very close[0]. We're basically going into the mitigation phase now by my understanding.

[0] https://www.space.com/climate-tipping-points-closer-than-rea...

1 more reply

pabs31y ago

> SO2 injection in the stratosphere

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Piercer#Plot

1 more reply

callamdelaney1y ago

And in 299 years the climate may have changed again, as it is wont to do (and has always done).

ClumsyPilot1y ago

And 65 million years ago an asteroid detonated with the power of all of the world’s nukes combined, so there is no need to worry about nuclear war.

And timespans are like that for climate too, millions of years not 299

1 more reply

mmoossOP1y ago

Is that a subtle attempt to argue that climate is changing on it's own, and not by human agency? Say it if you mean it.

nkrisc1y ago

And in 1000 years it will be different again. What’s your point? The fact it has and will always change doesn’t change anything about what’s happening now.

We can choose to mitigate the change or make it worse for ourselves.

mmoossOP1y ago

I wonder if they would have anticipated its value. I can anticipate a moon base would be valuable in 2123 even though it has little present value.

input_sh1y ago

Considering that 99 years ago both Maldives and India were still colonised (and would remain so for decades), I'm gonna go out on a limb by saying that no, Chagos Islands weren't seen as particularly important back then.

gaadd331y ago

It would have had some value as a coaling or oiling station thought

bunabhucan1y ago

Why would the worlds superpower need that when they had India?

logifail1y ago

Q: Is there a reason for making a lease 99 years, rather than - say - 999 years?

noselasd1y ago

Historically 99 years was the longest term for leases in English laws. I don't think that's incorporated in laws any more, but it has just continued as common practice.

frereubu1y ago

You may be right historically, but I don't think it's common practice any more - there are quite a few "virtual freehold" leases of 999 years, and most other domestic leaseholds are 125+ years when they start. When a leashold goes below 90 years its value dips sharply.

rswail1y ago

999 years is considered a "permanent" lease [1]. 99 years is considered a "more than a lifetime lease" [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/999-year_lease [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99-year_lease

Maken1y ago

So they can renegotiate the terms of the leasing in a reasonable time span?

fosk1y ago

I am sure that if at the end of 99 years the US or the UK still really really want to retain them, they will find a way (another lease, or by force).

Mauritius is not China. Not that I am suggesting for this to happen, but what are they going to do if the UK just decides not to leave after 99 years?

ClumsyPilot1y ago

They said basically the same thing about HongKong. You can’t predict political landscape in 100 years

Yeul1y ago

The Chinese negotiators for Kowloon deliberately settled on 99 years. Probably because they knew they'd be lynched by the Chinese public otherwise. It was not a mistake made by the British they just couldn't get a better deal.

ethbr11y ago

There are multiple islands and archipelagos in the region.

Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte

Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island

Diego Garcia just happened to be forcibly depopulated by the British, so was a convenient choice.

reaperducer1y ago

  Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte
  Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island

That's the whole point of Diego Garcia: It's not "close to" anywhere, and it's nearly in the middle of a bunch of places. That's what give it its strategic importance.

ethbr11y ago

The Maldives are only ~400mi N of Diego Garcia.

vel0city1y ago

So its 400mi away from another set of tiny islands which themselves are hundreds of miles from the mainland.

I'd still argue that's pretty much "not close to anywhere."

mmoossOP1y ago

I mean, what current option is equivalent to Diego Garcia? Are any of those options realistic right now?

ethbr11y ago

They're all pretty far from land and in the same general area.

If Diego Garcia were no longer an option, there would be alternatives. Especially with US levels of lease money.

That said, few of them are quite as remote as Diego Garcia. Which means not quite as easy to secretly fly RQ-180s or whatever the hell is more clandestinely based there.

mmoossOP1y ago

I don't think geography is the challenge as much as politics. What country and populace will give up their ancestral land to a foreign military base. Would you?

Remember that the small islands don't have much land to begin with, and bases are large.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

BurningFrog1y ago

The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable.

To a 1925 (99 years ago) military force, the Diego Garcia airfield would have had zero importance.

throw0101d1y ago

> The lease expires in 2123. The militarily strategic landscape then is pretty much unknowable.

I bet that's what the UK thought about Hong Kong in the late 1800s, but when 1996 rolled around I think they (and many HKers) would have liked a longer-and-99-years lease.

While geography isn't quite destiny, it is fairly important, and having a random rock in a place where there are no other rocks will always be useful IMHO (unless we perhaps develop teleportation).

BobAliceInATree1y ago

in 99 years, most of the island probably will be underwater due to climate change.

vixen991y ago

Further information on 13,000 islands: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17538947.2024.2...

BurningFrog1y ago

The island is certainly in the risk zone, but I think that is also unknowable.

My guess is that by carbon sequestering and/or SO2 injection in the stratosphere, the climate change will be controllable within a few decades.

skeledrew1y ago

It's very likely that we're already beyond some of the tipping points, and others are very close[0]. We're basically going into the mitigation phase now by my understanding.

[0] https://www.space.com/climate-tipping-points-closer-than-rea...

1 more reply

pabs31y ago

> SO2 injection in the stratosphere

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Piercer#Plot

1 more reply

callamdelaney1y ago

And in 299 years the climate may have changed again, as it is wont to do (and has always done).

ClumsyPilot1y ago

And 65 million years ago an asteroid detonated with the power of all of the world’s nukes combined, so there is no need to worry about nuclear war.

And timespans are like that for climate too, millions of years not 299

1 more reply

mmoossOP1y ago

Is that a subtle attempt to argue that climate is changing on it's own, and not by human agency? Say it if you mean it.

nkrisc1y ago

And in 1000 years it will be different again. What’s your point? The fact it has and will always change doesn’t change anything about what’s happening now.

We can choose to mitigate the change or make it worse for ourselves.

mmoossOP1y ago

I wonder if they would have anticipated its value. I can anticipate a moon base would be valuable in 2123 even though it has little present value.

input_sh1y ago

gaadd331y ago

It would have had some value as a coaling or oiling station thought

bunabhucan1y ago

Why would the worlds superpower need that when they had India?

logifail1y ago

Q: Is there a reason for making a lease 99 years, rather than - say - 999 years?

noselasd1y ago

Historically 99 years was the longest term for leases in English laws. I don't think that's incorporated in laws any more, but it has just continued as common practice.

frereubu1y ago

rswail1y ago

999 years is considered a "permanent" lease [1]. 99 years is considered a "more than a lifetime lease" [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/999-year_lease [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99-year_lease

Maken1y ago

So they can renegotiate the terms of the leasing in a reasonable time span?

fosk1y ago

I am sure that if at the end of 99 years the US or the UK still really really want to retain them, they will find a way (another lease, or by force).

Mauritius is not China. Not that I am suggesting for this to happen, but what are they going to do if the UK just decides not to leave after 99 years?

ClumsyPilot1y ago

They said basically the same thing about HongKong. You can’t predict political landscape in 100 years

Yeul1y ago

ethbr11y ago

There are multiple islands and archipelagos in the region.

Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte

Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island

Diego Garcia just happened to be forcibly depopulated by the British, so was a convenient choice.

reaperducer1y ago

  Close to Africa/ME: Maldives, Seychelles, Comoros, Mayotte
  Close to SE Asia: Cocos and Christmas Island

That's the whole point of Diego Garcia: It's not "close to" anywhere, and it's nearly in the middle of a bunch of places. That's what give it its strategic importance.

ethbr11y ago

The Maldives are only ~400mi N of Diego Garcia.

vel0city1y ago

So its 400mi away from another set of tiny islands which themselves are hundreds of miles from the mainland.

I'd still argue that's pretty much "not close to anywhere."

mmoossOP1y ago

I mean, what current option is equivalent to Diego Garcia? Are any of those options realistic right now?

ethbr11y ago

They're all pretty far from land and in the same general area.

If Diego Garcia were no longer an option, there would be alternatives. Especially with US levels of lease money.

That said, few of them are quite as remote as Diego Garcia. Which means not quite as easy to secretly fly RQ-180s or whatever the hell is more clandestinely based there.

mmoossOP1y ago

I don't think geography is the challenge as much as politics. What country and populace will give up their ancestral land to a foreign military base. Would you?

Remember that the small islands don't have much land to begin with, and bases are large.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse