Recent international developments, such as COP29 and the UK’s decision to cede control of the Chagos Islands, illustrate how reparations ideology increasingly influences Western foreign and security policy—often to its detriment. At COP29, developed nations pledged $300 billion annually in climate finance, effectively as a form of reparations for historical wrongs. Meanwhile, under Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the UK returned the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, drawing criticism from the United States, particularly President-elect Donald Trump, who sees this move as jeopardising vital strategic assets like the Diego Garcia military base. These decisions reveal the far-reaching implications of an ideology rooted in historical grievance and international virtue signalling, potentially compromising Western alliances and security.

The ideology behind reparations and decolonisation frames these actions as moral atonement for past sins—colonialism, slavery, and environmental damage. It posits an enduring Western debt to the Global South, necessitating financial compensation and territorial concessions. This narrative is advanced through international forums like the UN and COP, where Western nations are pressured to bear the burden of climate change and other global inequities.

The West cannot afford to engage in endless self-criticism in a world increasingly shaped by strategic competition

This reparations ideology rests on a simplistic interpretation of history, casting colonialism, slavery, and industrialisation as uniquely Western sins while ignoring that empires worldwide—from the Ottoman to the Chinese and Mughal—were equally engaged in conquest and subjugation. By focusing exclusively on Western wrongs, the reparations narrative not only erases the agency of non-Western nations but also portrays the Global South as a perpetual victim, creating a form of global welfare dependency backed by well-funded NGO ingrate activists that have tacked on left-wing goals of social transformation to the green agenda. In the words of Harjeet Singh, global engagement director for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, actual “progress will be measured not by promises on paper, but by tangible support for the most vulnerable, ensuring that justice and equity remain at the heart of climate solutions.”

This selective reading of history ignores the transformative benefits of industrialisation and capitalism. Industrial advances lifted billions out of poverty, improved global health, and increased life expectancy. Western-developed vaccines have eradicated diseases like smallpox and reduced the impact of polio. The Green Revolution, driven by innovations such as high-yield crops and modern irrigation, alleviated hunger in regions like Asia and Africa. Once facing severe food shortages, countries like India achieved self-sufficiency in staple grains due to these agricultural advancements. These achievements are a testament to the positive legacy of industrialisation—a force that empowered societies to overcome some of the most pressing challenges in poverty and food security. Far from being purely exploitative, Western innovations have paved pathways to prosperity for countless individuals.

The reparations and decolonisation narratives emerged during an era of Western dominance—first in a bipolar Cold War setting, then in a unipolar world after the Soviet Union’s collapse. Post-colonial theories gained momentum during this period, framing Western hegemony as the central cause of global injustice. However, the current world order is no longer unipolar but increasingly multipolar, with China and Russia asserting influence. The simplistic framing of Western dominance fails to account for today’s distributed power dynamics, where non-Western actors play significant roles in shaping global affairs.

The UK’s decision to cede the Chagos Islands to Mauritius exemplifies the risks of applying a reparations-based ideology in a multipolar context. The Chagos archipelago, particularly Diego Garcia, is vital for Western security interests in the Indian Ocean. By relinquishing control, the UK risks compromising a strategic asset and damaging its relationship with the United States, especially given the Trump administration’s concerns about weakening Western positions. This move also allows authoritarian powers like China to extend their influence in the region, potentially filling any vacuum left by the West.

Starmer’s adherence to reparations and decolonisation as guiding principles is particularly hazardous in this context. It signals a willingness to prioritise symbolic moral gestures over practical geopolitical considerations, risking the alienation of key allies and undermining Western efforts to counterbalance authoritarian regimes. The West cannot afford to engage in endless self-criticism in a world increasingly shaped by strategic competition. A guilt-driven foreign policy weakens Western resolve while emboldening adversaries eager to exploit these vulnerabilities.

Rather than capitulating to an ideology of reparations, the West must adopt a more balanced stance that recognises its significant contributions to global progress. Industrialisation, technological advances, and liberal democratic ideals are pivotal in improving human welfare. The challenge is not to dismantle the West’s legacy under a burden of guilt but to engage confidently with the world, defending its values and strategic interests while promoting genuine and mutual development.