The Commonwealth.
By Rummuser. Filed in People, Politics, Raves and Rants, Relationships |Tags: CHOGM, Commonwealth
My Blog friend Jim Belshaw at Personal Reflections has posted a detailed write up about the recently concluded CHOGM (Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting). I urge my readers to read his very interesting post.
After having been reading his posts for quite a while, I am convinced that Jim is an incurable Optimist and a Romantic. While I am tempted to say that I belong to that elite group, I am afraid that sometimes, only sometimes, I tend to be cynical about many things that Jim would find fascinating.
I have left the following comment on his blog. My readers from other Commonwealth countries may wish to chip in with their own, either here or at Jim’s post. The others will learn a great deal about this club and as Global citizens of this shrinking world, may want to do so too.
“As one of the 800 million Hindus and citizen of a Commonwealth country, AND and Anglophile, I think that it is a waste of taxpayers’ money to hold these junkets for mutual admiration by the CHOGMs. In the sixty years of its existence, it has not achieved one single sensible thing of common interest to the members of the ‘club’. With such amazing communication methods available to us the ‘diversity’ can be harnessed like you and I have done. I can tell you hair raising stories about what happens to Commonwealth funds used for so called development work in the less developed member countries. If I were to vote for its winding up, I would vote for a loud ‘yes’.”
Tuesday, December 1st 2009 at 22:04 |
“In the sixty years of its existence, it has not achieved one single sensible thing of common interest to the members of the ‘club’.”
From this quote, it sounds to me like this is evidence that the ‘club’ has been quite successful. With climate change on the agenda, it is extremely unlikely that something sensible would be done, while it is hard to identify any organization that has done something constructive with respect to human rights. As for the taxpayers’ money, the governments won’t give the money back if they don’t spend it on the Commonwealth, but can we assume the money will be spent better?
I see a club as something that brings together people from diverse backgrounds, but with one shared interest. The resulting interaction is the point of the club.
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 20:11
I see that Jim is answering all the comments and I shall refrain having made my views clear on two responses.
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 06:15 |
Even with one shared interest, there’s likely to be as many different opinions as people in the club. The interaction is fun for those who like debating & accept other’s opinions, but don’t expect anything to be accomplished.
(I wish I was as smart as Looney & Ursula.) (And Murphy)
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 20:10
BHB, you have broken my heart. Am I not in your list of smart people?
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 12:42 |
Bravo Ramanaji. You know, Ireland’s not a member of the Commonwealth. Never has been. Where’s the need?
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:12
Apart from that, I would like to see my tax money better spent than going into the pockets of unscrupulous leaders. Enough of that nonsense goes on here without that also getting globalized.
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 12:58 |
I agree with Looney’s definition of a club. And I absolutely adore BHB’s dry and matter of fact “… but don’t expect anything to be accomplished”.
Interesting, Ramana, that you’d actively vote ‘yes’ to abolish the Commonwealth. You clearly feel some passion on the issue. I don’t.
Going along with both Looney and BHB, I couldn’t care less: May the member states play on the remnants of what once constituted ‘the Empire’, even recruit. So what? Whilst Jim Belshaw’s reasoning is not consistent, his post jumping all over the place, he did highlight, inadvertently and most effectively, that the Commonwealth is a dinosaur. Irrelevant. Overtaken by, how did he put it: “… world governing” bodies. Precisely. However, human life is not about being efficient at all times. So let this “club” spend other people’s money, enjoy themselves, give them the illusion that they are effective. The ‘Commonwealth’ will die of natural causes, eventually; so why give it the ‘coup de grace’ before its time is up?
U
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:10
Why give it the coup de grace? I am still paying taxes and India is a big contributor to the common fund.
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 15:16 |
I’m an Australian, so in the club. I’m for winding it up. Though I guess we need to think of better ways for the money to be spent – given to some charities or micro-loan institutions perhaps.
Partly my reason is loathing the egotistical nonsense that goes on at these talkfests.
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 15:52 |
As R’s incurable optimist and romantic, I thought that I should probably make a brief comment.
Ursula, my post wasn’t intended to be a highly structured argument, simply musings on a topic. Nor, I think, did I “inadvertently” highlight the fact that the Commonwealth was a dinosaur. The Commonwealth is hardly extinct, although it may become so.
Looney, I thought, captured one point rather well: “I see a club as something that brings together people from diverse backgrounds, but with one shared interest. The resulting interaction is the point of the club.”
One of the problems for the Commonwealth is that some members want to move it towards more of a decision making body. That is not its role, nor can it be given the divergence of views within the organisation.
Within its limits, the Commonwealth does perform a useful role. Compare it to APEC. Still popular with some, APEC does not have a single achievement that I know of to its credit.
Gaelikka, as you know, there are strong historical reasons why Ireland is not a member of the Commonwealth. I can see very little gain for Ireland in joining. Ireland’s international prominence comes from its diaspora, it’s immediate foreign policy interests are driven by the EU.
That is not a criticism, by the way. Despite its crrent economic problems, Ireland as a very small country has done remarkably well through its EU connections. And through its diaspora.
Not sure with Evan just what money he is referring to, or indeed how it might be redeployed.
At the end of this CHOGM, it was announced that the next CHOGM will be held in Perth. Certainly the current Australian Government is displaying increased keeness!
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:09
A junket for all the CHOGMS to visit Australia and have a bit of mutual back scratching and exchanging information on where to stash the funds the CW secretariat will allocate to the various relatively less well off countries from the contributions made by the relatively better off members. Sorry if I am cynical Jim, but this is the reality. The kind of character that was exhibited in the earlier days of the formation of the Commonwealth in the leaders and the HOGs is simply absent now.
Wednesday, December 2nd 2009 at 16:29 |
BKB, you forgot to put Conrad and Maynard on your smart list. What’s up with that?
Thursday, December 3rd 2009 at 00:37 |
A brief follow up on my response to Evan.
I haven’t seen an estimate of the total cost of the Commonwealth, and it may be impossible to obtain. There are the direct costs of the Secretariat paid for by member governments; the cost of the various Commonwealth programs funded through the Secretariat or by member Governments; and there are the costs borne by individual Governments in supporting their own activities in the Commonwealth.
In all this there is a redistributive element in that the bigger members cross-subsidise the smaller members. There is also a rolling use-by date on some activities. For example, the support provided to newspapers and other media (technical and business) in smaller Commonwealth countries was important, but has diminished in significance as local media developed skills.
When Fiji was recently suspended from the Commonwealth, the head of the country’s largest media organisation was quoted as saying that the now lost support had been useful, but was no longer critical.
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:55
The commonwealth funding system is a classic example of the poor in the relatively well to do countries funding the rich in the relatively poorer countries. Except where there is active local involvement of proper utilization of funds and manpower, the funds disappear into offshore accounts of the powers that are in the poorer countries. The same applies for other NGO funds and sad to say, Missionary funds too.
Thursday, December 3rd 2009 at 12:40 |
Again, Ramana, we come to the optimism/pessimism thing!
As a general comment, I have to agree with you that a lot of development aid from all sources has been creamed of directly and indirectly and not just by Commonwealth countries. Directly into pockets, indirectly because the aid frees up other revenue for creaming. Further, some aid (food aid is an example) can actually have adverse long term effects in supressing local activities.
That said, not all aid has been a failure. I would not classify the Columbo Plan, Australian aid to Aceh, nor our involvement in East Timor as failures, although in Timor some of the UN support was clearly creamed off.
Aid can be good or bad. It depends on the way in which it was given. Now, and assuming that you are not aginst aid full stop, it may be that you feel that Commonwealth aid was worse than other types and that it has not improved.
There are two features of the Commonwealth that distinguish it from other international organisations. One are the links below the formal governmental. The second is the willingness, however reluctantly, to suspend or exclude members.
At some point I need to do a real assessment of the importance of both.
Rummuser Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 20:15
I quite agree with your penultimate paragraph. Is that enough? Are we still living in the noblesse oblige stage of the world’s development?
I look forward to the real assessment.
Friday, December 4th 2009 at 01:08 |
I must do a post on noblesse oblige at some point, Ramana. I think that the concept has gone, and that we are the poorer for it. To a degree, it’s place has been taken by a far harsher concept: I’m alright, Jack, and you would be too if you just did the right thing.
The real assessment will take a little time.
Today’s post on Personal Reflections looks at two different responses to the recent CHOGM, one on the nut-case fringe, the second from someone who was there as part of the people stream. This part of the Commonwealth’s activities are funded by the Commonwealth Foundation.
Coincidentally, there was a story early this morning on Australia’s ABC Asia/Pacific program about the Foundation.
60% of world HIV/AIDS sufferers live in Commonwealth countries. The Foundation has had a relatively small program directly funding NGO aids organisations. Apart from addressing the AIDS issue, this is part of an overall program trying to build civil society institutions from the ground up.
At CHOGM, the decision was taken to move from direct support to grant funding, with bodies having to apply for grants. This is very much the modern approach to public administration and is not without its problems. I suspect that the move was dictated by the official Government representatives on the Foundation’s Board.
The move has created a degree of anger and consternation in Pacific Island nations where the small sums involved are relatively quite important. The complaints included lack of consultation as well as the likely adverse side effects on anti-AIDS activities. The Foundation is now backtracking.
By the way, when you read Yawning Bread’s posts, look for the passing references to China. They provide an interesting microcosm of one aspect of Chinese activities round the world.
Friday, December 4th 2009 at 05:24 |
The real strength of the Commonwealth is not in its leaders but its peoples. There is a sense of belonging to a club of nations who have struggled to overcome their colonialist and colonialised roots and who are striving towards civilised and civilising relations.
There are few enough organisations in this world who’s aim is to forge a sense of community of peoples and on that basis, let alone for any other reason,it would be sad to see the Commonwealth end. That doesn’t mean it might not operate differently or better of course.