CAB148-30-Defence and Oversea Policy Committee Meetings Relating to 1967 Disturbances-1967 — Page 314

SECRET

2.

MAURITIUS: DEFENCE AGREEMENT

Page 314

SECRET

The Committee considered a memorandum by the Minister of State for

Commonwealth Affairs (0PD(67) 81) on a Defence Agreement with Mauritius.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS (Lord Shepherd) said

that it was necessary for us to open negotiations quickly for a Defence

Agreement with the Government of Mauritius in order to safeguard our communi cations centre there (HMS MAURITIUS) after the country became independent

on 12th March 1968.

There are two points of difficulty on the draft Agreement; the first,

which arose on draft Article 3, was how to deal with the undertaking to con-

sult in the event of a threat to the internal security of Mauritius, which

we had given at the Mauritius Constitutional Conference in 1965; the second,

which arose on draft Article 9, was the term to be set to the Agreement.

As regards draft Article 3, it was proposed that an undertaking to consult

with the Government of Mauritius on any request for such assistance which

would be in the Agreement itself, should be supplemented by a confidential

Exchange of Letters which would make it clear that the provision of assistance

would be entirely at our discretion. On the term of the Agreement, Mauritius

would wish to make this as long as possible; but we would prefer a seven-

year term.

Our negotiators should, however, have latitude to settle for up to ten years should this prove necessary.

In discussion it was argued that for us to take the unprecedented step

of undertaking to assist an independent Commonwealth country in the event

of a threat to its internal security would be inconsistent with our new

defence policy and, in particular, with our objective of withdrawing by

stages from our role East of Suez; instability in Mauritius, deriving from

its population explosion and economic difficulties might involve us in com-

mitments from which we might not easily escape. On the other hand it was

argued that we could not, because of changes in our own policy, go back on an undertaking that we had given in 1965. The facilities that we were

seeking to safeguard in Mauritius were important to us and the very limited

undertaking that was proposed as regards the internal security threat was

not inconsistent with our plans for a withdrawal from the Far East.

It was

important, however, that the length and extent of our commitment to assist

in internal security should be as restricted as possible in view of the

economic situation in Mauritius; we were at present providing budgetary aid

to Mauritius and any continuing internal security commitment on our part

which discouraged its Government from taking the necessary measures to correct the economic situation, would increase the risk of our having to

provide extre aid.

Page 314

-3-

SECRET

Page 314