A second Commonwealth could make Britain great again
Lord Howell of Guildford is the Shadow Deputy Leader of the Lords. A
former Minister in the governments of Edward Heath and Margaret
Thatcher, from 1987-1997, he was chairman of the Commons Foreign
Affairs Committee. Here is his proposal for a new and revitalised
Commonwealth.
Britain urgently needs a re-orientation of its foreign policy to meet
21st-century world conditions. The present, predominantly Eurocentric
approach ("we must work through ourEuropean partners" is the guiding
mantra) is not serving us well. Our interests are not being protected
and promoted as they should be, our contribution to global peace,
stability and development is not nearly as effective as it could be and
our own idea of ourselves and our purpose in today's world is blurred
and diluted. People like to say that the choice for Britain is between
Europe and America, that when it comes to global affairs we are
condemned to choosing between being plugged fully into the European
Union bloc, ineffective and divided as it is on major issues, and being
the lapdog of the United States. But the antithesis is a false one. We
certainly need partners in this highly interdependent world. The days
of go-it-alone are long past - for the Americans, as they have
gradually come to realise, as well as for ourselves. Talk of "a
sovereign independent foreign policy" sounds fine on the election
platform but is actually quite meaningless. But our partners must be
the right ones.
With the centre of world power shifting to Asia, and with the need to
repair the battered trans-Atlantic relationship, it is crystal clear
that the EU, while a valuable regional association, is not up to the
job internationally. On the contrary, it seems to amplify, rather than
calm, trans-Atlantic disputes. The Atlantic is growing wider and that
is not at all in Britain's, or the world's, interests.
So where should we look for like-minded friends and allies and for a
grouping which can maintain a friendly but firm dialogue with the
Americans - basically supportive but not afraid to be candidly critical
or even restraining - and be listened to in Washington with respect?
One answer is on our doorstep. Britain is a key member of a ready-made
network of enormous reach across continents, embracing many faiths and
bound by common ties of amazing intimacy, both governmental and
non-governmental - cultural, legal, sporting, linguistic, scientific.
This network is the Commonwealth. This may understandably raise
eyebrows because the track record of theCommonwealth as a force for
peace, development and stability has not been all that good. Is it not
just really a history-based talking shop? Has it not fumbled vital
issues like the Zimbabwe tragedy? And anyway, with all those
impoverished African states as members, where's the economic or
political beef in such an organisation? But that could be yesterday's
snapshot. The image of the Commonwealth has not yet caught up with some
startling new facts.
Today the Commonwealth contains seven of the most dynamic economies in
the world - India, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, Canada
and the United Kingdom. Forget the old ideas of primary producers
selling to the richer West, or Western investment in the impoverished
East or South. Today, the growing capital flows are changing as Indian,
Chinese and other Asiatic enterprises nose their way into Europe. The
hi-tech wave is coming from the East, and from India in particular,
which is scheduled by 2025 to have a national product larger than the
whole of Western Europe - the jewel indeed in the Commonwealth network
of the future. But despite all this, some doubts remain valid. Can the
Commonwealth really cohere on vital issues? Can it deliver real weight
and power, argue the corner of the smaller and poorer countries in a
way that the EU most notably does not do, and present one front on the
really key issues of democracy, rule of law, human rights, world
policing and a general commitment to free societies and free
enterprise? The answer is that the modern Commonwealth certainly has
the right underlying common values, but if it is to be an effective
platform the framework needs to be strengthened and enlarged.
In effect, the Commonwealth should develop its own foreign policy. It
should stretch out and work with other like-minded democracies who,
along with many existing members, want to be pro-American but not
subservient, and have their own perspective on key world issues, not an
American-imposed one. Japan is one obvious example. But so, too, are
countries like Poland, Turkey, Norway, the three Baltic states of
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Italy, Thailand and even some of the
democratising Gulf states such as the United Arab Emirates, Bahrein,
Kuwait, Quatar and Oman.
Put this group together with the existing membership and one would have
a kind of Commonwealth Mark Two, a rallying point for the planet's
"good guys" and a coalition of real might (it would contain more than a
third of the world's GNP), size, experience and influence. It would
also be a vastly greater source of soft power and influence for Britain
- the origin of the whole undertaking - than anything on offer from
Brussels, or indeed from the battered United Nations. Even on issues
like handling Iran - a matter for the Asian powers and Russia as much
as it is for the West (perhaps even more so), a strong and wise voice
from this greater Commonwealth would get a better reception than
threats of force from Washington, or the ignored diplomacy of the EU.
A Mark Two Commonwealth is not the complete answer. But it could do
better than anything forthcoming from the dated 20th-century
institutions we have inherited. It would also be a golden chance for
Britain to make her full contribution, in a way that our feeble foreign
policy just does not permit at present.