The world has become a very unstable and quite worrisome place. People are looking for friends. They’re looking at friends with whom they can deal and work not only in sympathy, but also in safety…reports Asian Lite News
It does not have the megaphone that enables other world bodies broadcast their small and big achievements, such as the UN and its star body the Security Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the European Union. But the Commonwealth of Nations has not only built up an impressive list of outcomes, it has, away from the limelight, led on key global issues, such as climate change.
Commonwealth Secretary General Patricia Scotland says this organisation of 56 member nations remains effective, relevant and engaged. But what sets it apart from the others is that it is like a family, tied by shared “love” and concern for each other.
Scotland spoke on the sidelines of the annual Spring Meetings of the World Bank group. Excerpt from the interview:
The Commonwealth of Nations has 56 members and it’s home to a quarter of the world’s humanity but it is barely heard on issues of significance; Ukraine, for instance, or the present global financial crisis.
Since 2016, the Commonwealth has really been at the forefront of a number of quite pivotal issues. We looked at the issues of debt; we looked at the issues of climate change; we looked at the issues in relation to corruption, looked at the issues in relation to women and domestic violence or the issues in relation to democracy and freedom.
On all of these issues, the Commonwealth has been right at the front, particularly in relation to climate. We are here right now (at the Spring Meetings) talking about the reform of the IFIs (International Financial Institutions), the need for us to have a universal vulnerability index because looking at the GNI as the arbiter for what should happen on climate finance is just not working.
Of course, the issues in relation to Ukraine are important to the Commonwealth in terms of food insecurity and the rise in the cost of living about which we’ve been talking a great deal because we identified that these exogenous shocks, which happened in one area, (have) disproportionate deleterious impact on our member states. So I think if what we are saying isn’t being covered as extensively as it could or should be, we are trying to change that’s why we’re having these conversations.
Do you think there is a need for the Commonwealth to change to adapt to this new world that is emerging, a multipolar world where you no longer have just the US and the Soviet Union or now Russia; there is China?
If you look at what has happened in the last seven years (since she took over as Secretary General) is that the Commonwealth is growing. It’s one of the only organisations which more countries are joining and (to which) more countries that left have come back. (Togo and Gabon, which were never parts of the Commonwealth, became last year its 55th and 56th members). They’ve been looking at the change that has happened in the Commonwealth, particularly in those countries, which are similar to them, who are in the Commonwealth, but who are doing exponentially better. And these countries are saying why. And why the Commonwealth is becoming so attractive, I understand, is because it’s a values driven organisation, not dependent on treaty, concentrating on common interests.
The world has become a very unstable and quite worrisome place. People are looking for friends. They’re looking at friends with whom they can deal and work not only in sympathy, but also in safety. As the rest of the world becomes more difficult, I think people are attracted to an organisation which is bound on values and is based on equality because in the Commonwealth, it doesn’t matter what size you are, how rich you are, how poor you are, you are equal.
If you look back at 2018 you remember, on the multilateral arena, nobody could agree on anything. You almost thought at one stage they couldn’t even agree on a cold custard tart. And they thought therefore it would be impossible for those areas which were so difficult and so complex globally to be agreed anywhere. If you look at our Commonwealth communique, the Commonwealth came together – we were then 53 countries — and we agreed on everything. We agreed on a new connectivity agenda. We agreed to create the blue charter (to work together on a fair, inclusive and sustainable approach to ocean protection and economic development), we agreed on what we were going to do on women, on every single issue. And it was extraordinary because here you had countries of all shapes, all sizes, five different regions across six oceans agreeing on everything.
Pic credits Facebook
We had a meeting of trade ministers and people said look, you know WTO was very difficult. You’re never gonna get anyone to agree on and you know how disparate that family is. The whole Commonwealth came together and we agreed – every Trade Minister agreed – on a Trade Ministers’ communique. The world looked at us ‘how on earth’. And the reason is not only do we respect each other, we listen to each other. But we don’t just look at what divides us, we look at what joins us. What we’ve been able to do in the Commonwealth is to work attention around that consensus.
India holds the G20 presidency for 2023. Any expectations?
India, the Commonwealth’s largest member and the current G20 chair, has a unique opportunity to leverage its position to advocate for inclusive, transparent and consultative reforms of the international financial institutions among its G20 members. India can also push for inclusive financial policies and advocate for debt relief.
London: Prime Minister Narendra Modi visits science museum with Prince Charles to view an exhibition on 5000 years of Science and Innovation, in London on April 18, 2018. (Photo: IANS/PIB)
It may be more useful for India to not severe ties with commonwealth but increase its influence in the commonwealth, writes Prof. Dheeraj Sharma
The origin of the Commonwealth is an outcome beginning the decline of the United Kingdom (UK) as a dominant global power. The First World War demonstrated two essential things to the world. First, Europe was as fragile as it was during the hundred-year war in the 1400s. Second, it ushered in the arrival of the United States on the world stage, an erstwhile colony of the UK. Many researchers contend that the UK realized it would be strategically important for it them to start treating their colonies better to maintain control over their affairs. As a result, the Statute of Westminster (1931), which served as the Commonwealth’s primary founding instrument, mandated that all Commonwealth members must be the UK’s dominions. The London Declaration in 1949, which allowed republics and monarchical countries to join the Commonwealth, provided they accepted King George VI as the “Head of the Commonwealth,” ended the requirement of being a UK Dominion.
The Commonwealth principles, however, were extended to the social, political, and economic spheres in the 1960s. Therefore, given that South Africa did not adhere to the social idea of racial integration, it was expelled from the Commonwealth.
The 1971 Singapore Declaration, which required all signatories to uphold the values of global peace, liberty, human rights, equality, and free commerce, sharpened the common guidelines of the Commonwealth even more. However, the primary outcome of the Singapore declaration was ‘rejecting coercion as an instrument of policy.’ This was also when the Persian Gulf Residency ended, marking an end to direct British domination in the Gulf. Specifically, the Singapore declaration clearly stated that the Commonwealth could not forcefully enforce its core values on its member states and could not use coercion. However, understanding the implications of the Singapore declaration, which would preclude the UK from interfering with the internal affairs of the Commonwealth members, the UK pushed for the Harare Declaration in 1991, which again reintroduced mechanisms and conditions under which the UK could get involved in the internal affairs of the Commonwealth member states.
The Harare Declaration provided an uncodified constitution to the commonwealth and also further specified the membership criterion. The Millbrook Commonwealth Action Programme (MCAP)), 1995, further defined this by requiring the Commonwealth to be concerned with its members’ domestic affairs. MCAP helped the Commonwealth Secretariat get its headquarters at London’s Marlborough House which gave it further authority to reward members who followed the rules and penalize those who disobeyed them. MCAP established the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), and it is tasked with reviewing and looking into situations of potential violations and recommending appropriate action against member states. For instance, Zimbabwe was allegedly punished for a violation in 2002. Later Zimbabwe withdrew from the commonwealth membership in 2003.
Pic credits thecommonwealth.org
Table 1 summarizes the key advances in the conceptualization of the Commonwealth.
Balfour, 1926
The committee, led by Lord Arthur Balfour, investigated and reinterpreted the legal connection between self-governing nations of the British Empire. According to the study, Great Britain and the Dominions are a set of autonomous communities that are regarded as equals, under no means subject to each other in terms of their external or internal affairs, and that are entitled to membership in the Commonwealth.
London, 1949
The Prime Ministers and Secretaries of State for external affairs of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Pakistan, and Ceylon met in London to discuss issues brought on by India’s acceptance of a Republic regime and desire for India to be part of the Commonwealth. Moreover, it reflected Commonwealth’s longstanding ability to reinforce its shared goals while modifying its organizational structure and operating procedures to suit changing conditions. It underlined its members’ liberty and equal treatment, not merely in how they relate to the Crown as Head of the Commonwealth, by dropping the “British” prefix from the organization’s identity. While allowing India to replace the Monarch as its head of India, the London Declaration highlighted that the crown was to be recognized as “the emblem” of the Commonwealth association. Nonetheless, India must acknowledge the King as Head of the Commonwealth.
Singapore, 1971 This declaration claimed that inter and intra-national understanding would contribute to eradicating discriminating people based on racial, ethnic, and religious distinctions. The main objective was to promote the free flow of international trade on terms equal to all while also considering the unique needs of developing countries. Rejecting coercion as a policy tool was the main outcome of this declaration. This was an important declaration which emphasized the limits of influence of head of commonwealth, UK.
Harare, 1991 This declaration laid a plan for the Commonwealth’s future, including a commitment outlining priorities. Further, it declared that Commonwealth is a voluntary agreement of sovereign independent nations liable for implementing their respective policies, collaborating and working together in the best interest of one’s citizens, and the endorsement of global understanding and harmony. It re-introduced that influence element of commonwealth. In other words, commonwealth could directly concern itself with any member nation if they find them violating the commonly held principles.
Millbrook, 1995 Post Harare, pathway was established for preservation and advancement of the commonwealth association’s core political values, including democratic structures and procedures, fundamental human rights, the legal system, judicial independence, and honest and ethical government. It was further decided to create a Commonwealth Action Programme during our retreat at Millbrook to more effectively carry out the pledges made in the Harare Commonwealth Declaration. There are three sections to this program:
We are advancing the core political principles of the Commonwealth, encouraging sustainable growth, and facilitating consensus-building. In other words, with establishment of core political principles one could judge deviation from those more precisely and accordingly a rationale to reward and punish those deviating from those principles was created.
Edinburgh Declaration, 1997 Extreme poverty and rising inequality make establishing global peace, security, and social stability impossible. It campaigned for special measures for countries’ integration, particularly for small states and least-developed nations, to overcome unequal development and solve the progress currently threatening many nations.
Colombo Declaration, 2013 Understanding the Commonwealth’s top priorities should be achieving inclusive and equitable progress. New elements such inclusive and equity as defined by UK was introduced as an element. Thereby, creating new standards for commonwealth nations to follow. Commonwealth started to examine issues of member state’s efforts to ensure benefits are distributed fairly and to raise everyone’s quality of life and economic success. Again, the definitions of fairness, quality of life, and economic success were that of UK. The differences across nations were not accounted.
Declaration on Commonwealth connectivity, 2018 To help Commonwealth nations meet the Sustainable Development Goals, it was emphasized how important trade and investment between nations are for increasing earnings and job opportunities. While the goals are largely aspirational, these do not account for differences in the level of development and economic constraints of least developed, under-developed, and developing members.
Given the expanded nature and scope of the Commonwealth and its ability to use coercive power against the member states, one wonders what member states gain from being Commonwealth members. A literature review in this domain indicates that most African nations are probably part of the Commonwealth on account of being former colonies. These countries engage in trade, free trade, and favourable immigration policies with the UK. In many situations, the UK can represent the countries’ interests by providing an embassy/consulate presence in various countries where these specific countries do not have their embassy/consulate.
Past research in the domain of the Commonwealth indicates that there are two conflicted views on the commonwealth. The first viewpoint presents the case of Gulf states which have a strong relationship with UK and have chosen not be commonwealth members. Most of middle-east is strongly entrenched in UK economy. In 1960s, Kuwaiti averted a financial crisis because of Pound Sterling reserves. Reciprocally, Qatari investment gives a significant backing to troubled UK assets and UK banks. In other words, Gulf States and UK have both benefitted each other in terms of bilateral trade and economic stability despite not being formally connected through Commonwealth.
In addition, UK offers military support to the middle-east despite no connection with Commonwealth. UK has a Joint Logistics Support Base in Oman, HMS Juffair, a permanent UK naval base in Bahrain, an Airbase in Qatar, military presence in Saudi Arabia and UK is also considering have a base in Kuwait, the British military retains a significant presence in the Gulf.
Second view demonstrate that a few countries entered Commonwealth voluntarily and not for economic or military reasons. A very rich and prosperous Brunei joined in commonwealth in 1984 to counter a powerful China and to get UK’s diplomatic and political network to safeguard itself. Also, Rwanda, which was formerly a Belgian colony, joined the Commonwealth to help it get global recognition through enhancement of international ties using UK’s diplomatic prowess. To satisfy the commonwealth, it quickly anglicized its education system and aligned its economy towards UK. More recently Gabon and Togo, who do not have any direct historical ties to British colonial empire, have become members.
Interesting India being in commonwealth does not fit with in either view. Therefore, it would interesting to examine why India decided to remain a commonwealth member despite its long and bloody struggle to earn freedom from the British monarchy? According to a seminal article in Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics authored by RJ Moore in 1981, it can be concluded that Lord Mountbatten was largely responsible for ensuring that India stays in the Commonwealth.
Moore analysed and cited several correspondences, minutes of the meetings, official records among others to professor his contentions in the research article. Moore contends that Lord Mountbatten negotiated with Baldev Singh (Defence Minister in Interim Government of India), Odisha Governor CL Tiwari, Prime Minister Nehru, and Secretary VP Menon in a series of interactions and, using guile, threats, and incentives, earned the resolution of the constituent assembly to be a member of the Commonwealth. Mountbatten could credibly convey the threat of isolation of India as most of the world at that time was either existing or erstwhile British colonies.
Records of time indicate that several political and non-political leaders indicated India should follow what Ireland had done. Ireland decided not to be part of the British Commonwealth and wanted to recognize and maintain a friendly relationship with the commonwealth. Furthermore, Moore contends through perusal of records that Mountbatten would parley with Baldev Singh, then the defence minister of India. His frequent communication was around the function of the Indian army if the British commissioned officers were to depart India. All officers at that time had King’s commission, and India would not be able to have ties to these officers if it was not part of the Commonwealth. All recognized at that point in time that the Indian army was vital to maintaining law and order situation as violence was predicted and likely to arise when the transfer of power took place. Britain really wanted India to be part of the Commonwealth.
The importance of India to Britain can be encapsulated in one quote of Lord Curzon in 1901 “as long as we rule India we are the greatest power in the world. If we lose it, we shall drop straightaway to a third-rate power.” So much so, since transfer of power entailed the partition of India, and the plan for this transfer of power was originally called Plan Balkan by the British. Finally, as per Viceroy’s personal report cited by Moore, Mountbatten even mooted the idea of some form of common citizenship for citizens of member states with the then-Indian bureaucracy and constituent assembly members of India to persuade Indian leaders to remain in the commonwealth.
As a result of these efforts, India became a member of the commonwealth via London Declaration. London declaration explicitly stated that the Government of India has finally agreed to establish itself as a “sovereign independent republic.” Still, it also asserted and reiterated India’s commitment to retaining her full membership in the Commonwealth of Nations and her acquiescence of The King as the mark of the voluntary expression of its self-governing member nations and, as such, the Head of the Commonwealth. The King is a symbol of free association! It appears to be a double entendre that one can enshrine democracy and democratic values through aristocracy.
Pic credits thecommonwealth.org
As far as India is concerned, there is no real advantage in trade. No real benefit as far as travel is concerned. No real advantage as far as defence is concerned. No real advantage as far as support is concerned. The obtuse attitude of the British government towards those who threaten the sovereignty of India is evidence that there is no real advantage of obtaining even advocacy from the commonwealth secretariat. On the contrary, the Commonwealth charter provides UK with a pulpit to comment on the internal affairs of other countries.
The 2012 Commonwealth charter contained sixteen core beliefs, namely, “democracy, human rights, international peace and security, tolerance, respect and understanding, freedom of expression, separation of powers, the rule of law, good governance, sustainable development, protecting the environment, access to health, education, food and shelter, gender equality, the importance of young people in the Commonwealth, recognition of the needs of the small states, recognition of the needs of the vulnerable states, and lastly, the role of civil society.”
Recently, we have witnessed British Parliament and British politicians commenting and conveying their concerns about Indian democracy, rising nationalism, governance, law order, gender equality, the youth of India, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech, among other topics. Commonwealth provides the UK with a platform to do so as the commonwealth has those core beliefs. The interpretation and application of those core beliefs are very much the interpretation of the British. In other words, how and how those core beliefs are lived in a given member country is up for assessment through a British yardstick.
Consequently, many contend that withdrawal from the commonwealth could be a way forward as it removes this vantage point view for the British government and politicians to comment on and discuss the everyday occurrences in India. It may be interesting to note that even Pakistan had withdrawn its commonwealth membership from 1972 till about 1989. Pakistan’s membership was also revoked and reinstated on more than one occasion. At the very least, the government of India must examine the pros and cons of exiting the commonwealth. COMEXIT (Commonwealth exit) denotes India’s exit from the commonwealth. COMEXIT needs a serious discussion at the highest level.
A survey of 2003 students in higher education institutions in India indicates that 94.5% of respondents felt India should exit the commonwealth and COMEXIT will be true signal of complete independence from British dominance. Of those who supported the exit, 72% stated that they support COMEXIT as India has today attained higher standing on the global platform that UK. 62% of the respondents supported COMEXIT because India is fifth largest economy. 60% of respondents supported COMEXIT because India is a large country with self-sufficient resources. 54% of respondents supported COMEXIT as they believed the commonwealth as institution is parochial and a remnant of the colonial era.
Although, the results of the survey indicates that there is a strong support for COMEXIT but I believe it may be more useful for India to not severe ties with commonwealth but increase its influence in the commonwealth. In recent times though, there have some changes, commonwealth’s official website indicates that the head of commonwealth is symbolic one with no fixed term and the position is not hereditary. In addition, the website states that future heads will be chosen by members of Commonwealth.
Does this provide an opportunity for India? I certainly think so. India is already holding the presidency of G20 and I am sure India would like to leave a positive and lasting legacy through it presidency. However, the next assignment for India and Indian diplomacy could be to gain the leadership of Commonwealth. Could it be that Prime Minister of India is head of Commonwealth next year? It certainly should be India’s aspiration. At the very least, the head of the commonwealth should be on rotation. Commonwealth could augment its contribution by defining it purpose with greater clarity through a non-Britain centric approach.
(Professor Dheeraj Sharma is Director IIM Rohtak. Views expressed are personal and exclusive to India Narrative)
This will be the first Commonwealth Day presided over by the UK’s King Charles III as King and Head of the Commonwealth…reports Asian Lite News
Commonwealth Day will be celebrated on Monday with observances, speeches, exhibitions and cultural events across the 56 Commonwealth member countries.
With ‘Forging a Sustainable and Peaceful Common Future’ as its theme, the day aims to unite 2.5 billion Commonwealth citizens in celebration of their shared values and principles, and in pursuit of a common future, centred on sustainability and peace.
This will be the first Commonwealth Day presided over by the UK’s King Charles III as King and Head of the Commonwealth.
The day will also mark the 10th anniversary of the signing of the Commonwealth Charter, which outlines the values and principles that unify the 56 Commonwealth countries, representing one-third of humanity.
In her Commonwealth Day Message, Commonwealth Secretary-General Patricia Scotland KC paid tribute to late Queen Elizabeth II for her seven decades of service and welcomed King Charles III for his first Commonwealth Day as the new Head of the Commonwealth.
Speaking on the role of the Commonwealth in her message, she said: “We stand together now to face the challenges of the moment and seize the opportunities of tomorrow. Where there is violence and conflict, we work for peace. Where there is insecurity, we protect the culture, process and institutions of democracy. Where there is poverty, we tackle it. Where there is injustice, we challenge it.
“Where our brothers and sisters have their lives threatened and disrupted by the impacts of climate change, we stand with them, working tirelessly for climate action and a more sustainable world. I believe profoundly that our family of 56 nations and 2.5 billion people is stronger, more vibrant, more connected and more purposeful than ever.”
Drawing attention to the growing cooperation within the Commonwealth at a time of polarisation, Secretary-General Scotland added: “Our unique qualities and advantages mean that the Commonwealth in 2023 is not simply a part of the international system, it is a beacon within it.
“These qualities shine in the fact that, with a multilateral system under strain, the Commonwealth is growing, precisely because of what we stand for and what we can deliver.
“So, on this 10th anniversary of our (Commonwealth) Charter, as we renew our commitment to its values and to each other, let us resolve together to ensure that in the years to come, we make the peaceful and sustainable common future we all strive for a reality for the whole Commonwealth.”
Around the Commonwealth, cities will host inter-faith, multi-cultural observances to mark the day. One of the largest gatherings will be the traditional service at Westminster Abbey in London and will be attended by The King, the Commonwealth Secretary-General, senior government officials, other dignitaries and hundreds of young people.
At the service, the theme will be expressed through musical performances, testimonies and readings from individuals representing several Commonwealth countries, including ‘Amalgamation Choir’, an all-female choir from Cyprus.
Commonwealth Day has been celebrated on the second Monday in March every year since 1977. In recent years, there has been a shift away from a single-day observance towards a full-week celebration, with Commonwealth Day as its focal point.
This year, as part of the Commonwealth of Nations Flag for Peace initiative, each Commonwealth country and every UK city will receive a flag, which they can raise on Commonwealth Day in celebration of the values of the Commonwealth Charter, including democracy, human rights, sustainable development, equality and respect.
Parliamentarians, mayors and high commissioners in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and Americas, the Pacific and Europe will also mark the day with various activities, including speeches and cultural events.
The Commonwealth Secretariat has also produced a special quiz for students to learn more about the modern Commonwealth and its diverse membership. Schools around the Commonwealth can download and use the quiz free of charge.
“An important role of the Commonwealth is to help to build consensus amongst our members on the vital issues that they face…reports Asian Lite News
Commonwealth law ministers on Thursday unanimously agreed to recommend the Commonwealth Principles on Freedom of Expression and the Role of the Media in Good Governance to Commonwealth Leaders to consider at the next Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM).
This week, law ministers from across the Commonwealth are meeting in Mauritius for the 2022 Commonwealth Law Ministers Meeting. This is the first in-person meeting of law ministers since the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic.
Welcoming the consensus, Commonwealth Secretary-General, Patricia Scotland, said: “I welcome the unanimous agreement of law ministers today to progress these principles for recommendation to leaders at our next heads of government meeting. The indispensable role of the media, the 4th estate, in a modern democracy cannot be overstated. Our Commonwealth Charter affirms that freedom of expression, including media freedom, is essential to the flourishing of democratic societies and a basic condition for development.
“An important role of the Commonwealth is to help to build consensus amongst our members on the vital issues that they face.
“By realising the values and aspirations of our Charter across all the countries of the Commonwealth, we will deliver political, economic and social systems and services which are robust, effective and fair, resulting in reduced demands on justice systems in the future.”
The primary objective of the Commonwealth law ministers meeting is to advance Commonwealth consensus and cooperation and to enable law ministers to set clear directions on a range of legal, rule of law and justice issues of mutual interest to member countries.
The Commonwealth Charter states that the Commonwealth is “committed to peaceful, open dialogue and the free flow of information, including through a free and responsible media, and to enhancing democratic traditions and strengthening democratic processes.”
During discussions, law ministers expressed gratitude to the Commonwealth Accredited Organisations for their hard work, dedication and valuable contribution to and development of the draft principles and also thanked the expert working group, chaired by a representative of Jamaica, for their valuable contributions to reaching an agreement.
Ahead of this week’s discussions, law ministers received a paper to consider on freedom of expression and the role of the media in good governance in the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth’s diverse membership spans to include 56 countries and it is home to 2.5 billion people and includes both advanced economies and developing countries. Commonwealth member governments have agreed to shared goals on development, democracy and peace and the Commonwealth values and principles are expressed in the Commonwealth Charter
India proposes cooperation with Germany for ocean research
To apply, countries must be a member of at least one of the 10 Commonwealth Blue Charter Action Groups or indicate their commitment to join…reports Asian Lite News
The Commonwealth Secretariat has announced the first call for proposals under the newly-established Commonwealth Blue Charter Project Incubator.
New technical support and funding is being made available to governments to support projects that promote ocean protection and marine development, while tackling climate change.
This includes small grants worth between 5,000 and 50,000 pounds targeting a range of activities that support ocean policy and project development, such as training, capacity-building, knowledge exchanges and rapid climate risk or vulnerability assessments, ideally carried out in collaboration with a non-government partner.
Speaking at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP27), the Commonwealth Secretary-General, Patricia Scotland KC, urged all member countries to apply.
“With 49 out of 56 member countries bordering the ocean, including 25 small island developing states, the Commonwealth accounts for more than one-third of the ocean under national jurisdiction. The Commonwealth Blue Charter Project Incubator is a critical step forward in supporting these countries in the delivery of their ocean commitments, including those under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 as well as their Nationally Determined Contributions.
“I strongly encourage member governments to take advantage of this call for applications and submit robust proposals that support the development of sustainable blue economies, while addressing one of the greatest global challenges of our time — climate change.”
Nicholas Hardman-Mountford, Head of Oceans and Natural Resources at the Commonwealth Secretariat, added: “The Blue Charter Project Incubator provides a vehicle for all Commonwealth governments to pilot innovative solutions addressing their most urgent national priorities for ocean sustainability and resilience, learn from each other’s experiences and build capacity for implementation.
“With ocean action and marine conservation (SDG14) being the least funded among all the Sustainable Development Goals, this is an important contribution that recognises the role of our ocean as the world’s largest carbon sink and a home to the majority of Earth’s living species.”
To apply, countries must be a member of at least one of the 10 Commonwealth Blue Charter Action Groups or indicate their commitment to join.
The Commonwealth Blue Charter is an agreement by all 56 Commonwealth nations to work actively together to address some of the world’s most pressing ocean challenges. It is implemented through 10 country-led action groups focusing on key thematic areas: coral reef restoration, mangrove ecosystems and livelihoods, marine plastic pollution, marine protected areas, ocean acidification, ocean climate action, ocean observation, sustainable aquaculture, sustainable blue economy and sustainable coastal fisheries.
Barely days into King Charles III’s reign, murmurs of a mass exodus from the Commonwealth club are already stalking the new king…reports Asian Lite News
Commonwealth nations could “rush for the door” of the bloc after the death of Queen Elizabeth II, an expert has warned. In addition to the UK, Charles III now rules in 14 Commonwealth countries that were former dominions of the British Empire.
But barely days into King Charles III’s reign, murmurs of a mass exodus from the Commonwealth club are already stalking the new king. Professor Philip Murphy, the former director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, has argued that several countries in the Commonwealth could make “a rush for the door” over the coming years. Will Charles oversee the final disintegration of this remnant of empire?
“A movement had already started before she died,” he said. He added that it was being driven by “a combination of things like the Black Lives Matter movement, the Windrush scandal and the growing momentum behind the move for reparations for slavery and colonialism. If you want to write a history of the world of international relations, certainly since the 1990s, you would be hard pressed to find a reason to mention the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is so insubstantial it doesn’t have any impact at all, and no one would notice if it disappeared tomorrow, in terms of its practical effects,” Professor Murphy said.
To think about the Commonwealth’s place in the modern world, it is important to consider what the institution is. The transition from the British Empire to Commonwealth implied that the hierarchy between Britain and its colonies would dissipate with independence. Now each state would be equal to each, sharing sovereignty, status, and wealth in common. But older divisions of geography, race, and economic power continued to slice through this “family of nations.”
Think of the differences in movement and access enjoyed by the different people of the Commonwealth. In 1962, the Commonwealth Immigration Act was passed by the Conservative government, which ended the automatic right of people from the British colonies and Commonwealth to settle in the UK.
Though it made all Commonwealth citizens subject to possible immigration control, the target of this law was not white people coming from New Zealand or Australia. Conservative Home Secretary Rab Butler said that the act’s “great merit” was that it looked like it would apply to all parts of the Commonwealth, when in reality its “restrictive effect is intended to, and would in fact, operate on coloured people almost exclusively.”
Commonwealth migration came to mean only people migrating from Africa, South Asia, or the Caribbean, not places like Canada, and was discussed by Conservative politicians as a new specter haunting Britain. Enoch Powell, a prominent Conservative member of Parliament, argued that this migration would give rise to “rivers of blood” flowing across the nation, and in his wake, Margaret Thatcher described her fear that with increasing Commonwealth migration, Britain was being “swamped by people with a different culture.” This was not the rhetoric with which the queen liked to suggest that the people of Nigeria, Sri Lanka, or Trinidad and Tobago were family.
With republican movements gaining ground from Australia to the Bahamas, the new king also faces a challenge keeping the Commonwealth realms in the royal fold, the report said.
Several are already set to vote on becoming republics and replace him as head of state now that nostalgic ties to the late monarch are broken by her death.
Barbados became a republic last year and Jamaica has indicated its desire to follow suit. Antigua and Barbuda’s prime minister Gaston Browne said it would vote on whether to remove the royal family as head of state.
As well as the UK, Charles is now head of state in Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.
Even today, in ostensibly independent countries like Jamaica and the Bahamas, if you have a legal dispute, in theory your final hope of resolving it will be a direct appeal to King Charles III. This functional, legal element of the legacy of British rule across some territories of the Commonwealth shows that the questions being asked in this debate concern more that the “symbolic” role of the monarchy.
The change in monarch comes at an auspicious time for the Commonwealth, as a number of countries—including Jamaica and Australia—had already been making moves toward removing the queen as head of state, and these calls are likely only to grow now she is being succeeded by her less popular son. Barbados already transitioned into a parliamentary republic in 2021, lighting the way for other Caribbean countries that want to follow in its wake. As the protests that greeted Prince William and his wife, Kate, on their tour of the region showed, republican feelings are very much on the rise in the once trusty British West Indies. Meanwhile, much of the British public has only a vague idea of what the Commonwealth actually is. In the past, polls have shown that one in five Brits couldn’t name a single Commonwealth country when asked. Not Jamaica, not India, not even Australia.
With republican movements gaining ground from Australia to the Bahamas, the new king also faces a challenge keeping the Commonwealth realms in the royal fold..reports Asian Lite News
Commonwealth nations could “rush for the door” of the bloc after the death of Queen Elizabeth II, an expert has warned, media reports said.
In addition to the UK, Charles III now rules in 14 Commonwealth countries that were former dominions of the British Empire, Daily Mail reported.
With republican movements gaining ground from Australia to the Bahamas, the new king also faces a challenge keeping the Commonwealth realms in the royal fold, the report said.
Several are already set to vote on becoming republics and replace him as head of state now that nostalgic ties to the late monarch are broken by her death.
Barbados became a republic last year and Jamaica has indicated its desire to follow suit. Antigua and Barbuda’s prime minister Gaston Browne said it would vote on whether to remove the royal family as head of state.
Professor Philip Murphy, director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, said that the movement had already started before the Queen died last week, Daily Mail reported.
“A movement had already started before she died,” he told the Times. He said it was being driven by “a combination of things like the Black Lives Matter movement, the Windrush scandal and the growing momentum behind the move for reparations for slavery and colonialism”.
“If you want to write a history of the world of international relations, certainly since the 1990s, you would be hard pressed to find a reason to mention the Commonwealth,” he added, Daily Mail reported.
“The Commonwealth is so insubstantial it doesn’t have any impact at all, and no one would notice if it disappeared tomorrow, in terms of its practical effects.”
As well as the UK, Charles is now head of state in Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.
Gaston Browne made the announcement minutes after signing a document that confirmed King Charles III as the new head of state but emphasised that the move was “not an act of hostility”.
Several are already set to vote on becoming republics and replace him as head of state now that nostalgic ties to the late monarch are broken by her death…reports Asian Lite News
Commonwealth nations could “rush for the door” of the bloc after the death of Queen Elizabeth II, an expert has warned, media reports said.
In addition to the UK, Charles III now rules in 14 Commonwealth countries that were former dominions of the British Empire, Daily Mail reported.
With republican movements gaining ground from Australia to the Bahamas, the new king also faces a challenge keeping the Commonwealth realms in the royal fold, the report said.
Several are already set to vote on becoming republics and replace him as head of state now that nostalgic ties to the late monarch are broken by her death.
Barbados became a republic last year and Jamaica has indicated its desire to follow suit. Antigua and Barbuda’s prime minister Gaston Browne said it would vote on whether to remove the royal family as head of state.
Professor Philip Murphy, director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, said that the movement had already started before the Queen died last week, Daily Mail reported.
“A movement had already started before she died,” he told the Times. He said it was being driven by “a combination of things like the Black Lives Matter movement, the Windrush scandal and the growing momentum behind the move for reparations for slavery and colonialism. If you want to write a history of the world of international relations, certainly since the 1990s, you would be hard pressed to find a reason to mention the Commonwealth,” he added, Daily Mail reported.
“The Commonwealth is so insubstantial it doesn’t have any impact at all, and no one would notice if it disappeared tomorrow, in terms of its practical effects.”
As well as the UK, Charles is now head of state in Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.
Gaston Browne made the announcement minutes after signing a document that confirmed King Charles III as the new head of state but emphasised that the move was “not an act of hostility”.
At the next Commonwealth Summit, the Secretariat should make public figures relating to the trend line of the proportion of minorities in countries of the group, writes Prof. Madhav Nalapat
Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri initiated the Green Revolution and began transforming India from a famine-stricken nation to an exporter of food grains. In this task, Shastri received substantial help from both Indian as well as US scientists. Both sides worked to ensure better farming methods, seeds and easier access to items needed to boost productivity. In the future, the provisions of the Farm Bills that were withdrawn in a gesture to the relatively small percentage of farmers (mostly from a single state) who opposed it need to be made effective at the state and not the union level.
Just as Prohibition (of alcohol) is a state subject, so too should be several other fields of policy and legislation such as the farm bills. It was Prime Minister Narasimha Rao who initiated the process of changeover from the Soviet model that had been imposed by Prime Minister Nehru and continued in various forms under his successors. As PM, Rajiv Gandhi did make efforts at reform, including in the field of telecom and in seeking to devolve responsibility to the panchayat level. India was a country where the then Finance Minister opposed in the 1980s the introduction of colour television. Once Rajiv took over as PM in 1984, such a recalcitrance to embrace rather than shun the change that progress brings was sought to be cast aside.
Unfortunately, very soon the entrenched party and state bureaucracy began to have an overpowering influence over Rajiv Gandhi, thereby emasculating his attempts at reform. Although Satyen Pitroda ensured that a trunk call, even to a faraway location, became a matter of routine due to the changes made by him, ensuring that telecom innovators were permitted in the private sector as well had to wait until Narasimha Rao took over in 1992.
Had there been a Roosevelt or a Kennedy rather than a Clinton in the White House, Rao as PM could have gone much further than he did. Where the world outside the Atlantic Alliance was concerned, President Clinton (a) ignored the growing risk caused by Wahhabi extremism, while (b) ensuring through measures initiated or backed by the White House that the Chinese Communist Party was given as much help as possible to someday overtake the US as the world’s most consequential country. Only after Narendra Modi took over as Prime Minister in 2014 did a more constructive relationship develop between 7 Lok Kalyan Marg (the official home of the Prime Minister of India) and the White House, whether under Presidents Obama, Trump or now Biden.
Once Modi took over, the same upward movement in bilateral relations was visible even where the UK was concerned. Both Prime Ministers David Cameron and Boris Johnson adopted a friendly tone, a situation likely to continue once 10 Downing Street becomes the official home of either Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss. The latter as Foreign Secretary has hopped with zest onto the reckless sanctions and weapons supply bandwagon piloted by Biden and Johnson since the war between Ukraine and Russia erupted less than six months ago. Seeking to exclude trade and contact with Russia, a country that is half the size of Europe, while being half the size of Asia, is another of the exercises in self-destruction that European leaders seem prone to, as was witnessed during the first half of the 20th century.
Candidate Truss has announced in the Global Britain forum that the Commonwealth will be a priority for her, should she get more votes among Tories than Sunak and take over from Johnson. This easygoing organisation needs to focus on a matter of supreme importance to human rights, which is an alarming fall in the number of minorities within some of the members of the Commonwealth. Apart from holding soirees and generating events filled with light entertainment, it is not clear as to what the Commonwealth as an organisation actually does. The Commonwealth Secretariat needs to compile a statistical tables of the number and proportion of minorities within the countries in its ranks. There are countries where minorities have almost disappeared, while in some other member states, their number is dwindling at an alarming rate.
Oddly, supporters within the UK of the extremists that are killing and driving out Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh are precisely those who seek to divert international attention from such crimes by instead obsessing on India, a country where there are 230 million citizens belonging to the minority communities and counting. It would appear that a knowledge of mathematics is not the strong point of the leaders of the Atlantic Alliance, who have thus far ignored the fate of the minorities in Pakistan or Bangladesh, reserving their obloquy for India in the face of evidence that points to the need to do the contrary. At the next Commonwealth Summit, what is needed is for the Secretariat to make public figures relating to the trend line of the proportion of minorities in countries of the group.
Any country where the minorities are made to feel unsafe and who therefore relocate (forcibly or otherwise) to other countries needs to be called out. Not just wealth but values are important in a group that is significant in its size although not as yet in its influence. A common standard for rights and common values ought to be made an accurate description of the Commonwealth. For such an outcome to come about, the organisation needs to get serious about ensuring that human rights are protected in every member state, and that women and minorities in particular are given equal treatment within any member state and not discriminated against.
Majority and minority ought to be equally and fairly treated. Ignoring the need to have universal accountability for universal values is a moral morass that the Commonwealth needs to avoid. Instead, it must ensure that countries where minorities are diminishing in plain sight ought to be called out. Such an “inconvenient truth” has all too often been ignored by self-proclaimed champions human rights. Principles need to be universally and not selectively applied, at least in the Commonwealth.
It will be Sajan and Srihari’s second successive CWG appearance. The duo, along with Virdhawal Khade, competed at Gold Coast 2018…reports Asian Lite News
Tokyo Olympians Sajan Prakash and Srihari Nataraj, along with debutants Kushagra Rawat and Advait Page, will represent the Indian swimming team at the Commonwealth Games 2022 to be held in Birmingham from July 28 to August 8.
The Indian swimmers were considered for four available quotas after achieving the qualifying mark set by the Swimming Federation of India (SFI). The CWG swimming events will be held from July 29 to August 3.
It will be Sajan and Srihari’s second successive CWG appearance. The duo, along with Virdhawal Khade, competed at Gold Coast 2018.
Sajan Prakash, who became the first Indian swimmer to directly qualify for the Olympics last year, will compete in the men’s 50m, 100m and 200m butterfly events at Birmingham 2022, a olympics.com report said.
On the other hand, the 21-year old Srihari will swim in men’s 50m freestyle, 100m and 200m backstroke events and Kushagra Rawat and Advait Page will compete in the men’s freestyle categories.
Notably, India are yet to win a Commonwealth Games swimming medal.
