From the archives – Original Articles: The Modern Commonwealth

[This is an excerpt from an article which first appeared in 2011 in The Round Table: The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs. It was based on a speech delivered by Chief Anyaoku on 5 July 2010 in London, as part of the joint centenary celebrations of the Round Table Journal and the Royal Over-Seas League. The article offered the author’s reflections on the achievements and the challenges of the Commonwealth, and provided some advice on how the organisation should develop for the future.]

The crucial question is whether our association can make proper use of these many platforms, in regional and international bodies, for promoting well-established Commonwealth positions. On a whole range of issues – from debt relief and the special vulnerabilities of small states, to climate change and the challenge of HIV/AIDS – the Commonwealth has been a pace-setter. It has raised issues ahead of their time, often before a sceptical audience. It has used its ability to generate consensus within the organisation (which, after all, is a microcosm of the world) to carry forward that agreement globally. It is a familiar and proven approach – not negotiating for the world, but, in those memorable words, helping the world to negotiate.

The Commonwealth is of the world, and in the world. It is not an organisation that can afford to be inward-looking, or to remain solely in its comfort zone. Its influence must reach beyond its boundaries, regionally and globally.

Of course, there is no reason why the Commonwealth should not continue to grow in membership, and perhaps in unexpected areas (as Mozambique and now Rwanda have demonstrated). The key requirements must be that aspiring members agree to abide by the organisation’s fundamental principles, and that they accept its core attributes (such as the universal use of English as the ‘lingua franca’). Certainly, Mozambique has been an exemplary and enthusiastic member (even if the country’s accession to the organisation prompted a worried visit to my office from the Foreign Minister of Portugal). Rwanda, I am sure, will be no different.

There are, however, other forms of partnership, short of membership, which can be just as valuable. The Commonwealth could usefully develop the idea of ‘dialogue partners’. At the Trinidad and Tobago CHOGM last year, leaders were joined by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, the then Danish Prime Minister and prospective host of the Climate Change Summit, Lars Rasmussen, and the French President, Nicholas Sarkozy. Coming a few short days before the Copenhagen Summit, this was a valuable opportunity for the Commonwealth to present its own ideas on climate change to the global forum. I hope this use of the platform of CHOGM for global outreach will be repeated.

During his election campaign, President Obama promised ‘a new era of global co-operation’ and, leading Nigeria’s delegation to his Inauguration, I was one of millions inspired by his words. It is only now that those words – and the doctrine they represent – are beginning to have an impact. Multilateralism is once more on the ascendancy, but it is realistic and more than aware of the many perils that still disfigure our world.

The Commonwealth, as always, will act in the service of the United Nations, as well as its members; and there will be other areas of influence – such as in the remarkable growth in intra-Commonwealth trade and investment – where the organisation’s presence can be felt.

A Commonwealth Connecting People

The third area where the Commonwealth needs to maximise its contribution is in connecting and communicating with people across the divides of race, religion or region. The Chief Rabbi in the UK, Lord Jonathan Sacks, once remarked that whereas the 20th century was the age of ideology, the 21st century will be ‘the age of identity’. As interdependence and the enormity of the global issues we face increase, so inevitably power is sucked away from the nation-state in the search for supranational solutions. For the ordinary citizen, there is a sense of disempowerment, of helplessness and of frustration. Frequently, any sense of identity is swallowed up or used to mark out difference and ‘otherness’. Conflict can result as often within states as between them.

This inability to recognise and cherish identity and to manage diversity remains one of the most important issues of our time. Professor Amartya Sen’s compelling report for the Commonwealth on ‘Respect and Understanding’ pointed the way to practical programmes from a Commonwealth uniquely qualified to help. Certainly, my experience has been of many occasions when the Commonwealth, drawing on its diversity, has been able to speak to divided and troubled societies.

For example, in November 1991 at my first of many meetings with the then President F. W. de Klerk during the two years of the negotiations that ended apartheid and ushered in democracy in South Africa, I won his attention and abiding interest by offering that in assisting the negotiations, the Commonwealth would relate to all the racial groups in South Africa.

The Commonwealth through the eyes of its former secretaries-general – Chief Emeka Anyaoku
The Commonwealth, Mandela and the Death of Apartheid

It is precisely because the Commonwealth is viewed by its members –  and by not a few beyond its membership –  as trustworthy, impartial and non-threatening that it is able to cross divides and work behind the barriers of national sovereignty. Often with minimal resources but with the Secretary-General assisted by high-quality emissaries and staff, the Commonwealth is able, in that well-worn phrase, ‘to punch above its weight’.

There is a down side. Conflict resolution and the use of good offices are often at their most effective away from the glare of publicity; but, sometimes, working in discreet and non-public ways can give the mistaken impression to the world that the Commonwealth is doing nothing. In no time at all, that impression can become an embedded truth.

Too often, the lack of resources for intensely important conflict resolution work meant that we were operating on the edge of credibility. That is true of the resource position generally. The Commonwealth’s uniquely valuable development arm – the Commonwealth Fund for Technical Co-operation – remains pitifully underfunded, despite the ceaseless attempts of successive Secretaries-General to persuade governments otherwise.

I understand, however, that there has been some progress here. At the Port of Spain CHOGM, agreement was finally reached on a new scale of contributions to the Secretariat. New members will also now be bringing additional resources to the organisation. None the less, the budgets for Commonwealth co-operation through the Secretariat, the Commonwealth Foundation, the Commonwealth of Learning and the Commonwealth Youth Programme, together with the many non-governmental Commonwealth organisations, are in total a small fraction of the revenue budget of Westminster City Council, for example. The Commonwealth cannot exist on goodwill alone. The potential to do much more is there – but it has to be recognised and properly funded. I therefore call on member governments to provide that vision and support.

Chief Emeka Anyaoku served as the third Commonwealth Secretary-General from 1990 to 2000.