Go global – and set the agenda
IS the Commonwealth in danger of becoming “a marginal international institution, doing good works and blessing a host of unofficial organizations?” As someone who worked for the Commonwealth for over 25 years, I have become used to the carping about the value of this organization, which has always been based on an underlying hostility to the way it operates on the basis of equality and its multiracial character.
Even after Commonwealth’s successes in many fields, not least in its role in ending Apartheid in South Africa, the doubts about its usefulness remain. Now the new question is: has globalization made it irrelevant? But, as they have done for half a century, supporters of the Commonwealth have challenged these criticisms and have set out new areas where it can play an effective role.
At a series of meetings sponsored by the Royal Commonwealth Society and the Commonwealth Association (which represents former Commonwealth Secretariat and Foundation staff members), a group of distinguished international affairs specialists argued that the Commonwealth has always been an institution with staggering potentials to take the lead in setting the global agenda.
Globalization has not made the Commonwealth irrelevant – in fact it has made it even more essential. Changes in international priorities in the current globalized world have underline the interdependence of the global community and economy. Global crises of environment, security, even of human survival, have increased the need for consensus building and understanding – attributes which the Commonwealth has pioneered for decades.
This was music to the ears of people who have worked to spread the ideals of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth agreed in 1971 that it should be an association based on non-racism, knowledge and respect for all races, religions and cultures and that its members should meet as equals, whether they were highly developed and rich; developing and poor, big or small and in some cases, minute islands in faraway places. If this is not what the world badly needs today, what is?
The speakers at these recent meetings were Lord Howell of Guildford, a former Conservative government minister; Sir Shridath ‘Sonny’ Ramphal, former Commonwealth Secretary-General; Sir Peter Marshall, former Deputy Secretary-General; and Dr. Vincent Cable, MP, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats, and former Economic Adviser in the Secretariat.
But there is an underlying worry, which we all share, that Commonwealth member states are not fully aware of the need to demonstrate some boldness in using the organization to set the global agenda.
As Sonny Ramphal pointed out, the Commonwealth speaks for a quarter of the world’s people, and could be an exemplar for global cooperation. It could speak with one voice on important development and financial issues, but while it might not be decisive in terms of results, it could make the right results more probable.
David Howell added that the Commonwealth now contains 13 of the world’s faster growing economies, including the most potent emerging markets. Outside the US and Japan, the key cutting edge countries in information technology and e-commerce were all members. Because of its flexibility and informality, the Commonwealth has been able to operate and adapt itself more readily to the new conditions, particularly those surrounding international economic issues. It has also done so to a greater extent than any other significant international entity.
Peter Marshall made the point that the Commonwealth enjoyed a broad consensus on issues of universal concern as well as an impressive record of cooperation over a wide range of government and non-governmental endeavours. This is a solid basis on which to forge a strong perception of the way ahead, not only for itself but for the global community.
All these speakers, including Dr. Cable, felt that the Commonwealth is an under-utilized international asset. It must raise its game and expand its activities; it has a real role in securing world stability and in pointing the way on how to bring richer and poorer, small and larger nations together in respectful and friendly terms.
The free democracies of the Commonwealth, David Howell added, should be prepared to step into the vacuum which the collapse of America’s soft power democracy has created. Perhaps there is a need now for the Secretariat to develop its external wing and appoint a High Representative to carry out some new diplomatic tasks. I think that while this is an ambitious proposal, if the Commonwealth is to make its mark in this new century, its leaders and Secretariat must be more proactive in establishing its role in tackling some of the world’s more intractable problems.
It should not be left entirely to the leaders of rich countries and pop stars, prodded by non-governmental organizations, to come up with all the ideas say about poverty eradication. The leaders of poor countries must have their say on these and other issues and where better to articulate their ideas than in the Commonwealth? The question now is not whether, in a globalized world, there is a role for the Commonwealth but, as Sonny Ramphal asks, can the Commonwealth “play the privileged role our time presents and our circumstance demands.”
Patsy Robertson, a member of the CPU Executive Committee, is a former Director of Information and Public Affairs at the Commonwealth Secretariat.
Culled from CPQ,