The Remain of the British Empire

The Commonwealth is a unique global organisation. An imperialist legacy, it was not designed but instead evolved from the gradual disintegration of the once-mighty British Empire. As former colonies successfully fought for independence, the British government looked for ways to keep these nations together. Eventually it evolved to become a family of nations with strong relationships in trade and shared cultural values. But what does it mean to the world and to its members today? Speak Up met with Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies and professor of British and Commonwealth History at the University of London. Murphy, who is also the author of the book Monarchy & The End of Empire (2013), began by placing the Commonwealth into historic perspective.

Philip Murphy (English accent): From the British point of view there is this idea of the Commonwealth as a sort of anaesthetic, which Britain applies to itself during the loss of Empire. So it doesn’t feel as limbs being taken away. ‘Independence’ is a dirty word really in Whitehall in the 1950s and 1960s —instead these are simply countries which are moving from one status within the British Empire to another in the Commonwealth, but the essential link remains.

closing the door

At first, trade was a common link between Commonwealth nations. Commonwealth citizens were British subjects and held an automatic right to settle and work in the United Kingdom. This helped to maintain the bonds between the populations of very different countries and cultures within the Commonwealth:

Philip Murphy: Residues of these trading arrangements lingered on into the 1970s and slightly beyond, but beyond the 1960s, trade had ceased to become the issue that tied the Commonwealth together. There was no longer a strong sense of common citizenship, of course beginning with the 1962 British Commonwealth Immigrants Act, Britain started closing the door, which had been an open door, for all Commonwealth citizens around the world.

MONARCHY

To date, the head  of the Commonwealth has always been the British monarch. Since her coronation in 1953, Queen Elizabeth II has been an important figurehead for the organisation. The long-serving royal has attended Commonwealth meetings and conferences, and has visited most Commonwealth nations. The Queen has been described as the “invisible glue” that holds the Commonwealth together. What will happen when she is no longer alive, or too ill to continue?

Philip Murphy: That actually I think is quite a difficult situation for the Commonwealth —it doesn’t bode well for its ability to create a kind of independent agenda which is actually relevant. And of course the headship of the Commonwealth is not hereditary. When the Queen dies there will have to be a decision by Commonwealth members over its future and how that will be done is not entirely clear nor is the outcome.

challenge

Remaining relevant in today’s hi-tech world facing climate change, pandemics and unprecedented crises is perhaps the biggest challenge facing the Commonwealth. How can it best succeed?

Philip Murphy: I think it needs to be able to show that it’s done at least one thing well. Even if it’s a fairly modest thing...  So it’s very good at holding conferences about climate change and youth leadership and that sort of thing. The challenge comes when you say, ‘Well what did you actually achieve?’ And unless it can do that eventually even the convening power of the Queen, who won’t live for ever, won’t prevent the crisis, which is going on already, of national leaders saying, “It’s not worth my time to go to a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting,” even if it’s just every two years. And it will slowly decay.