The debate over the excision of the Chagos archipelago from the Mauritian territory in 1965, three years before independence, will flare up soon. But Prime minister Paul Berenger?s statement last week about high hopes of recovering sovereignty over Diego Garcia has only given rise to high speculations.

How will he go about achieving his goal, following legal advice from a reputed British Chambers, is a question left unanswered. The government is not ready to unveil its plans yet. If the Prime minister?s statement is properly understood, it boils down to one idea. The steps to be taken aim at bringing the British government to the negotiation table.

But Blair?s government will not negotiate without a round of arm-twisting. To achieve this, Mauritius may have three options: the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in La Hague or recourse to a British court. Paul Berenger?s statement came last week whilst the ICJ was holding a three-day hearing on the legality of the security barrier Israel is building to keep out suicide bombers.

Mauritius has never been to the ICJ because this court usually acts as an arbitrator when two states agree to abide to its decision. The British Government will not accept such an arbitration and Mauritius has so far never considered the ICJ option. But the Palestinians may have recently shown the way. Last December, they obtained that the UN General Assembly ask for a ICJ non-binding opinion whether Israel?s barrier breaches international law. 90 nations voted for and 74, including all European Union states, abstained.

The Mauritian case may be stronger than that of the Palestinians. The excision of the Chagos archipelago violates the UN Declaration 1514 of 1960 and Resolution 2066 of December 1965. Getting the UN to vote for a non-binding opinion from the ICJ will provide Mauritius with a forum and an international stance and probably a UN resolution.

It is believed that Blair?s government will not allow things to go so far for many reasons. Local political analysts are convinced that Blair would prefer to negotiate instead of going to court over the legality of the excision. Mauritius may achieve more or less the same goal by suing the British government, this time through a British subject or a group of British subjects in an English court.

The Diego Garcia issue has always aroused passions. There is not a single citizen in Mauritius who is against any idea of recovering sovereignty over the archipelago. The rank and file of the MMM have believed since 1971 that ?Diego Garcia has been stolen from Mauritius?. The capital that Paul Berenger?s government may reap out of a recovered sovereignty or part sovereignty over the Chagos archipelago is unimaginable.

But whatever the strategy, time is running out and general elections are on the doorstep?