A Scorecard for the British Commonwealth, Seven  Decades Later

What’s the point of having a Commonwealth, anyway?

Our world is teeming with people or agencies who fail to practice what they preach:  doctors who smoke 40 cigarettes a day; teachers who cheat on grades; politicians who accept bribes; accountants who forget to file their tax returns; financial institutions that launder cash for terrorist organizations; and the UN Security Councils that fails to intervene decisively in a political crises. The British Commonwealth of nations is no different.  When people talks about the British Commonwealth they are usually referring to the association of countries consisting of the United Kingdom and several former British colonies  who still pay allegiance to the British Crown even though they are now sovereign states(The Commonwealth, 2014; The Royal Household, n.d.). With fair justification, the  only remarkable thing about the club of former British colonies is that it exists at all. It is important to note here that the countries who are members of the British Commonwealth(which comprises of almost a third of the  world’s population) are 53 in number,  excluding Burma and Aden.

 

The big question, of course, is whether the citizens of its member nations actually knows its purpose. For instance, when asked who is the head of the Commonwealth, about a quarter of Jamaican citizens will reply that they are ready to bet  that it is Barack Obama(The Economist, 2013). Even some of the enlightened citizens of the member nations would probably cite the Commonwealth games, which is normally held every four years, as a proof of the club’s active involvement in the affairs of its members.  From a functional point of view, the club member nation’s most important concessions was that it runs a good scholarship program and development projects for its poorest members, particularly those of them in Africa, Caribbean  and Asia. The British Commonwealth also runs a tangled and ineffective bureaucracy, including the Secretariat, Commonwealth Foundations, Royal Commonwealth Society, and 67 other organizations, which appears to exist  mainly to provide extravagant trips and celebrations for a well-heeled Commonwealth elites in Britain, Canada and other rich member nations.

 

If the experience of the past five decades teaches us anything, it is that the British Commonwealth has, in most cases,  actually failed in fulfilling its obligations to its member nations. The facts speaks for themselves:  The organization has a poor record of enforcing  its members’ commitment to human right and the rule of law. The latest embarrassment for the organization occurred when it allowed Sri Lanka’s abusive regime – a regime that has the autocratic and corrupt  President Mahinda Rajapaksa as its Tsar – to host a biennial Commonwealth leaders’ meeting in November 2013(The Telegraph, 2014). There are, however, similar instances that showcases the organization’s failures with respect to ensuring that its member nations follow its rules. For instance, even though the Commonwealth partially suspended Nigeria in 1995 after it hanged Ken Saro-Wiwa  - a human rights activist - on that year, it showed little interest on the abuse of the Ogoni people who were doomed on an oil-rich Niger Delta area of Nigeria,  and whose plight motivated Ken Saro-Wiwa’s human rights campaign(BBC, 1995). Also, the organization suspended Pakistan in 1999 after the coup that occurred that year but showed little interest about the habitual abuses against religious minorities and women in that country.  In spite of these, the club do share some beneficial British legacy: The members are bonded by a common language – that is, English – a common legal code and aspects of shared cultural norms. In a sense this advantages had , to some extent, helped some of the members, particularly those African members,  to prosper: the African members of the clubs, including Nigeria and Kenya, are conspicuously better-off than their non-commonwealth neighbors, such as Central African Republic, Liberia and Sudan. This, more than anything else, explained  why a country like Rwanda, which was not colonized by Britain but by Germany and Belgium, chose to join the Commonwealth in  2009(The Royal Household, n.d.).

Commonwealth’s Future – Back to Basics

It would be logical to suggest here that a more focused and agile Commonwealth could do more to reinforce those advantages within the member nations. According to the available published evidence, some right-wing Eurosceptics in the British Conservative Party are suggesting that the club be transformed to become an alternative free-trade zone to the European Union(The Economist, 2013). Even though this type of “Commonwealth Dream” may never come to pass, it will definitely be a good idea to gear the club towards trade and economic development. When done the right way, the two would become mutually reinforcing in the long run. From an entirely practical standpoint, achieving this important feat will take better leadership than the Commonwealth has so far enjoyed during its eight decades of existence.  What is certain is that insidious post-colonial  politics means that Britain and other rich members, such as Canada and Australia, are not be willing to provide this kind of leadership. Hence the onus is on the developing countries who are members of the club, chiefly  India, South Africa and Nigeria, to push for this kind of Commonwealth reform. The unhappy truth, however, is that they, on their current political state and  form, are leery about taking on such a role in a club that they appear to find not only endearing and somewhat useful, but also faintly embarrassing. But that does not alter the basic fact that the British Commonwealth needs to implement serious reforms in these key area – reforms that can be induced by agitations from the developing member nations .

References

BBC(1995): 1995 – Nigeria Hangs Human Rights Activists. Retrieved March 3, 2014 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/10/newsid_2539000/2539561.stm

The Commonwealth(2014): About Us. Retrieved February 27, 2014 from http://thecommonwealth.org/about-us

The Economist(2013, November): The Economist Explains. Retrieved March 2, 2014 from http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/11/economist-explains-12

The Royal Household( n.d.): Commonwealth Members. Retrieved March 3, 2014 from http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandcommonwealth/commonwealthmembers/membersofthecommonwealth.aspx

The Telegraph(2014): Britain “Timid” Allowing Sri Lanka to Host Commonwealth Summit. Retrieved March 3, 2014 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/srilanka/10383546/Britain-timid-allowing-Sri-Lanka-to-host-Commonwealth-summit.html