Queen of the World: Elizabeth II: Sovereign and Stateswoman

by Robert Hardman

  Anyaoku’s plan would formalise what had previously been a more personal, less structured role for the Queen. There was no opposition. The Edinburgh summit also occurred just before the golden wedding anniversary of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. Anyaoku organised a present from the Commonwealth, and suggested a contribution of £1,500 from the larger nations and £1,000 from the smaller. He was delighted when every nation insisted on the higher amount anyway. A large decorative panel, featuring the Commonwealth emblem, was commissioned for the Windsor Castle restoration, plus paintings of a peacock and a golden oriole for the couple’s private collection of bird pictures.

  After Edinburgh came a gradual increase in the royal presence. The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall attended the fringes of the 2007 summit in Uganda. Come the 2015 Malta summit, they were on the stage with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. This was not just about gently elevating the profile of the Prince of Wales within the organisation, but about boosting the profile of the organisation itself, with an enhanced role for the star of the show. One of the Commonwealth’s inbuilt advantages is a lack of rules. Like Britain’s unwritten constitution, it continuously evolves by consensus rather than by codified regulation. So as more and more international groupings and summits compete for space in the diaries of world leaders, the CHOGM format has adapted.

  It is an irony that the founders of the modern Commonwealth were so keen to minimise the role of King George VI and his family, whereas today’s leaders have no qualms at all about royal interference. Rather, it is one of the factors that helps attract the attention of both world leaders and the media. Remove the royal presence and many politicians and the press might find that they had other engagements when the next CHOGM came around. Today’s Commonwealth is not the global powerhouse of yesteryear; it is a good place for networking, but not the great geopolitical circus it once was. Beef up the royal presence, on the other hand, and at least the calibre of the delegations will rise accordingly.

  A ‘BLOODY USEFUL NETWORK’

  Commentators and critics routinely question ‘the point of the Commonwealth’. They contrast its campaigns on behalf of women in the developing world with the fact that most of its fifty-three member states still criminalise homosexuality. Its supporters point out that, in an imperfect world, it is in the vanguard of reform. Kamalesh Sharma, Secretary-General for eight years, is proud that of the fifty-two nations in Africa, it is those that are members of the Commonwealth that show the highest standards in terms of democracy and the rule of law. He points to two globally respected monitors of good governance, the Mo Ibrahim Index and the Berlin-based Transparency International. ‘Those guys don’t take any nonsense,’ he says. ‘And every year seven or eight of the top ten will be Commonwealth members. What are the odds on that result, year after year, out of fifty-two nations? I always say to the heads of government: “This is what sets you apart”.’ Sharma argues that it was the Commonwealth that was the first intergovernmental group to introduce its own system of policing, penalties and punishments.

  It may not have been enough to prevent corrupt dictators, like Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, from persecuting their opponents and robbing their people. No one likes to be suspended or thrown out of a club, though. Over the years, countries like Pakistan and Fiji may have been excluded from the fold for bad behaviour for a few years, but they have always been extremely keen to get back in again. Zimbabwe, the Maldives and Gambia all resigned as members, before they could be expelled for human-rights abuses. Gambia returned in 2018 after a change of regime and was formally welcomed back with a ceremony at Marlborough House. Its Ambassador formally became a High Commissioner once again and, a few days later, was delighted to find himself at Commonwealth Day drinks with the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge. Gambia’s flag was brought out of the Marlborough House cupboard, where it had been stored for five years, and resumed its place alongside the flags of all the other Commonwealth nations that fly above the Mall. The same cupboard still contains the flags of Zimbabwe and the Maldives, both carefully wrapped up, waiting for the day when they fly once more. Like a family – and the Queen insists that this is a family – you can have rows and feuds and door-slamming walkouts. Yet you never really leave.

  It is why David Cameron has mixed views on the Commonwealth. ‘It creates a normality of behaviour, expectations, rules. You just wish it did less shilly-shallying. It is a bit disappointing because it is by consensus and too wobbly. It is never as tough as you want it to be,’ says the former Prime Minister. ‘It’s a great network. You get to know a bunch of people who you might never get to meet. You learn a lot about issues, spend quality time with important leaders from India and Pakistan and so on. But do you actually get things done as a Commonwealth? Only a bit.’

  Sir Simon Fraser, head of the Diplomatic Service during the Cameron years, offers a frank assessment from the British diplomatic perspective: ‘The Commonwealth is not an efficient diplomatic instrument because it is a very diverse group of countries. It is misplaced to think it is going to become a terribly important instrument of our foreign policy. But having said that, it’s a hugely useful asset in this area of soft power linked to the monarchy and international relations in the broader sense . . . I’m not a traditionalist by nature but if you’ve got valid traditions, you should maintain them.’ Harvard’s Professor Joseph Nye, creator of the concept of ‘soft power’, concurs: ‘It’s a mistake to think of the Commonwealth as an effective executive institution. It’s not,’ he says. ‘But as a place where people can pull together, and where Britain is at the centre of a network, it’s a very important aspect of British soft power.’

  It is a long-standing Foreign Office complaint that Britain is in an impossible position within the Commonwealth anyway. If it pursues a policy with vigour, it is accused of rewinding the imperial clock and waving a big stick. If it stands back, it is accused of indifference. It was often said, during the Blair years, that the only reason Tony Blair attended any Commonwealth events was that he would be accused of snubbing the Queen if he did not. The considered view of many other nations, however, is that Britain is not nearly engaged enough. ‘It is very very important for the UK to have that locomotive function,’ says Kamalesh Sharma. ‘There must be a sense of belief that we have a special organisation.’

  For all its faults, though, there are two aspects of the Commonwealth that confound its critics. Once in the club, countries never want to leave. And there have been some pretty unusual applications for membership. Former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says that he was always struck by the fact that all these outposts of the old empire were so attached to the ex-colonial club. ‘There is this argument that the empire was wrong but no one would have signed up to the Commonwealth if the empire was as terrible as it is now being written up,’ he comments. ‘In fact, you now have additional countries trying to join.’

  He recalls that in 2004, during a visit to Algeria, the President asked if his country might join. ‘I thought “What?” So, I asked the interpreter and he said: “Yes, he wants to join the Commonwealth”.’ Since 1995 even countries that were not part of the former British Empire have been eligible to join, if they have a close connection to those that were, and are willing to convert to speaking English. Mozambique (formerly under Portuguese rule) and Rwanda (once a Belgian colony) are both enthusiastic recent recruits, the latter having been accepted as host for the 2020 summit.

  A more recent application has been that of Togo, formerly part of imperial France. The former Secretary-General, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, says that he once received an application from the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, during the mid-Nineties.

  Lord Howell, the President of the Royal Commonwealth Society, even recalls an approach from Japan during his days in government. ‘This minister said: “We would like to cooperate with you in India and we’d like to join the Commonwealth.” I said it was not quite like that, that they had their Emperor and we have the Queen and so on.
Then he said: “Joint venture? Joint venture?” ’ Lord Howell is in favour of some sort of associate membership that would give the wider world access to some of the Commonwealth’s non-political activities – particularly in areas like education and business. Countries like Japan, he says, are ‘mystified’ that so many ex-colonies want to remain linked to the former imperial power, via the Queen. ‘It is a huge compliment to the UK in historical terms,’ says Sir Malcolm Rifkind. ‘There is no nostalgia for empire whatsoever in those countries and a lot of criticism. Yet, there is also this feeling that this period of their history was not 100 per cent negative. We’re talking about civil service, the rule of law, the English language and so on.’

  Having spent most of its existence talking about human rights, the Commonwealth is now looking at new ways to harness its own commercial potential. In 2017, the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council – a business-led organisation that tries to keep its distance from politicians and bureaucrats – organised its first trade summit. More than thirty trade ministers from around the world came to Lancaster House in London. They heard the Council’s chairman, Lord Marland, outlining the prospects for intra-Commonwealth trade (predicted to exceed a trillion pounds in 2020) and the mathematics of the so-called ‘Commonwealth advantage’. This asserts that a business deal conducted between two Commonwealth nations costs 19 per cent less than the equivalent deal between non-Commonwealth nations, thanks to a shared language, legal system and established business practice. A year later, the Council held its own business forum alongside the 2018 Commonwealth summit, attended by the Prince of Wales, Bill Gates and 800 businessmen, including non-Commonwealth delegations from China and Saudi Arabia. The event was so oversubscribed that it could have sold three times the available space.

  In Britain, talk of Commonwealth trade would inevitably become embroiled in the debate about Brexit. Those in favour of leaving the European Union would point to the business potential in reengaging with old Commonwealth allies following Britain’s release from EU trade rules. Those opposed to Brexit would point out that Britain’s trade with the Commonwealth is tiny compared to that with the EU – just 9 per cent of UK exports, compared to 44 per cent for the EU – and that it is deluded imperialist lunacy to suggest that the old empire will solve Britain’s problems.

  Even the most passionate Commonwealth fans have never claimed that, however. ‘I try to damp that down. I don’t see the Commonwealth as an alternative,’ says Lord Howell. ‘But it is dawning on people that the Indian Ocean is as important as the Atlantic; that this is a post-West era; that we have to network like hell in Asia, and the Commonwealth is a bloody useful network.’ Both Britain’s allies and rivals wonder why the UK does not make more of its Commonwealth connections. Lord Butler recalls a conversation between Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan on the subject. ‘President Reagan said: “You’re very fortunate in having the Commonwealth because you meet, at one meeting, leaders of fifty-odd countries of the world that an American president doesn’t have a chance to meet in the whole of their term of office”.’

  Britain’s relationship with the Commonwealth, however, is very different from that which France enjoys with towards its own ex-imperial association. The Paris-based Francophonie has a very simple priority: the promotion of all things French. Chief Emeka Anyaoku says that the two organisations reflect two very different colonial philosophies. ‘The French believed in assimilation so the Francophonie thrives on French culture. The British believed in letting you remain what you were. So the Commonwealth emphasises diversity.’

  Kamalesh Sharma says that the two organisations get on well and frequently collaborate when dealing with global entities like the G20. ‘The head of the Francophonie once said to me: “We only came in to existence because of you!” ’ Formed in 1970, the Francophonie maintains a more relaxed admissions policy and different tiers of membership. Countries need only the flimsiest French connection – if any – to join. Full members include Greece and Macedonia, while ‘observer’ members include Uruguay, Mexico and Ukraine, none of them known for speaking French. Since France is content to pay nearly all the bills, no one seems too bothered if the French President takes charge.

  ‘The French President has the upper hand,’ says Marc Roche, veteran London correspondent of Le Monde and French-language biographer of the Queen. ‘Some of the members have been pretty stinky.’ He cites Omar Bongo, ruler of Gabon for forty-two years, and Mobutu Sese Seko (of dog-smuggling repute), who plundered £10 billion during his thirty-two years in charge of Zaire. ‘It can be a nasty business. You don’t have that in the Commonwealth.’

  The Head of the Commonwealth is also a de facto member of the Francophonie, since she is the Queen of Canada. With more than seven million French-speaking citizens, Canada is an active member of both organisations. Roche recalls comparing the rival organisations with the Queen at the Harare Commonwealth summit in 1991. ‘I said to her: “We have the Francophonie which is the equivalent”. And she said: “Yes, it’s the same. But it’s very different, you know.” Those were her exact words. You can read what you like into that!’

  As far as the Queen is concerned, however, the Commonwealth is about a great deal more than gatherings of argumentative politicians. Nor has she come to expect a great deal from a secretariat that, despite its palatial premises at Marlborough House, has a global budget of less than £50 million. That is less than one-fifth of the annual budget of a single London borough. ‘We once worked out that we cost less than the canteen facilities at the United Nations,’ says one Commonwealth staffer. Since a change of leadership in 2015 and the appointment of Baroness Scotland, the first woman, as Secretary-General, there have been a series of awkward leaks about internal finances and no sense of a grand new strategic vision. Fresh initiatives on cleaner oceans and the plight of small island states have made some headway, but the organisation is unlikely to regain anything like the clout it enjoyed during the war against apartheid.

  However, the formal endorsement of the Prince of Wales as the Queen’s successor provides a sense of long-term continuity at a leadership level. At the political level, there is a sense of stability. The return of a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe to the fold would add to the sense of a Commonwealth that, in the words of one British diplomat, has ‘got its mojo back’.

  As Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand puts it: ‘In today’s environment, with this fractured approach to issues and this individualism within countries, to know that there is actually an organisation with common values and common goals feels more important now than it ever has.’

  Few could recall a CHOGM as contented and even-tempered as the 2018 summit in London and Windsor. The host, Prime Minister Theresa May, puts a lot of that down to the Queen herself. She recalls the surprise on the faces of many leaders when the Queen suddenly walked in to a reception during the retreat element of the summit. ‘People hadn’t known that was going to happen,’ she says. ‘Seeing the Commonwealth leaders all queuing up to speak to Her Majesty really showed the family nature of it.’

  One former Marlborough House veteran reiterates the allure of the Queen. ‘At the end of the day, some of them might be a bit sniffy about Britain and the monarchy,’ he says, ‘but they all love a bit of royal jelly on their toast.’

  FRIENDS AND FRIENDLY GAMES

  The success of the 2018 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting underlined a resurgence in the other side of the organisation, the daily people-to-people operations that carry on in spite of (rather than because of) the politicians and bureaucrats. It is this work that the Queen and her family are particularly keen to support.

  Since her Diamond Jubilee in 2012, she has been launching or promoting one very substantial Commonwealth initiative after another. All have followed that familiar pattern: they all involve young and dynamic individuals rather than governments.

  On a miserable winter evening, Buckingham Palace is filling up again. The Duchess of Cambridge and the Countess of
Wessex are the co-hosts of the Commonwealth Fashion Exchange, uniting designers and tiny artisan producers from all over the Commonwealth. All through the state apartments, famous fashion-industry figures study the results over champagne and canapés. One mannequin is draped in a joint creation between London-based Stella McCartney and a silk cooperative from southern India. New Zealand’s Karen Walker has teamed up with a group of craftswomen in the Cook Islands. Among the up-and-coming designers is Euphemia Sydney-Davies, thirty-one, a true child of the Commonwealth. Having fled a Sierra Leone war zone at the age of five with her mother, she moved to Gambia, then Kenya and finally to Britain. Having teamed up with a weaver of high quality kente cloth from Ghana, Euphemia is standing in Buckingham Palace, discussing the finer points of her creation with, among others, the Duchess, the Countess and Anna Wintour, editor-in-chief of Vogue. No words, she says afterwards, can do justice to the occasion. It has been, quite simply, the most exciting night of her life. The following day, a few weeks short of her 92nd birthday, the Head of the Commonwealth herself will continue this theme by attending her first catwalk show at London Fashion Week. No model, no designer and no outfit will attract as much attention as the Queen.