Prince Charles 'blasts Commonwealth'

BBC Africa Service | March 10, 2002

[Clive]

The Prince of Wales has said the Commonwealth deserves "contempt" if it does not stand up for liberal democracy and human rights, it has been reported.

According to the Sunday Times, the prince said the organisation was "drinking in the last chance saloon". He said the election and how Zimbabwe was treated by the Commonwealth was "the biggest test since it had been created".

But the organisation was "failing the test and this was causing long-term damage to its credibility".

The prince spoke after Commonwealth leaders agreed not to take punitive action against Zimbabwe in the run-up to this weekend's presidential poll, despite widespread reports of violence, intimidation and vote-rigging.

He was also reportedly appalled by the treatment meted out to UK Prime Minister Tony Blair - who had called for immediate action - at their meeting.

He described anti-white comments by Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe and other leaders as "distressing".

He said failing to act over Zimbabwe will raise the question of what the Commonwealth is for, and said "dictators shuffling round the place is pretty unedifying". Commonwealth Day

The prince's comments come on the eve of Commonwealth Day, an annual celebration of the organisation of 50 or so mainly former British colonies.

The day will be celebrated by the prince and the Queen, at events at Westminster Abbey and Buckingham Palace.

Charles could succeed the Queen as head of the Commonwealth, although some of the organisation's leaders have reportedly said in the past that it is not necessarily a hereditary post.

The prince's comments echo similar comments from Mr Blair on Commonwealth "fudging" and "credibility".

He told the House of Commons last week that it must act on Zimbabwe's "clear violations" of the core Commonwealth values of good government, tolerance and racial harmony.

"The credibility of the Commonwealth itself is at stake. The procedures laid down... are clear and action must follow, up to and including suspension," he added. Instead of suspending Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth at the summit in Australia, leaders opted for urging President Mugabe to end the political violence.

They also set up a three-member committee to decide possible action, based on the findings of the group's election observers deployed in the country.

[Clive]

-

[Clive]

-

[Miss Marple]

This is interesting. The Royals don't usually inject themselves into foreign policy, do they?

[Consort]

What's up-Chuck?

[CatoRenasci]

No, they typically studiously avoid policy, unless the government asks them to step in (for example in Edward VII agreeing to create enough peers to pass the Irish Home Rule bill in 1909-10).

[Snuffington]

This is interesting. The Royals don't usually inject themselves into foreign policy, do they?

I think the Queen is the last Windsor to respect that sort of tradition. The rest seem to say and do whatever they want.

[Clive]

The Royal family has to be so circumspect that if one speaks out on foreign affairs, there is a deliberate geopolitical message intended to be passed, and not a personal one.

A fortiori where the issue is the Commonwealth as the members are very touchy about any perceived attempts at dictation from London.

Questioon is whether this is Buck House, Whitehall or Downing Street talking and if so, which one, or is it more than one, or is the message coming from wider sources in the Commonwealth.

[Severa]

Call me painfully ignorant when it comes to Prince Charles and his royal family (and chalk it up to the American HS way of teaching world history, class of 95 here), but can someone answer me the following:

I read not too long ago that Prince Charles married his longtime sweetheart, Camilla Parker-Bowles. If that's the case, does that effectively kill any chances of him becoming King?

[SuziQ]

Mugabe is a thug, and Africa will NEVER progress beyond what it is today unless it can get beyond it's 'tribal' mentality and start thinking about individuals and their God given rights.

[Willie Green]

The Royals don't usually inject themselves into foreign policy, do they?

In recent decades, they've become Britain's equivalent of Disneyland/Hollyweird.

[Miss Marple]

Thank you. I thought this seemed to be unusual, and therefore important.

[Ranger]

Glad to see Chuck stands up for something important. Keep it up Chuck.

[white rose]

Charles and Camilla aren't married. From what I've read, nobody really knows what would happen to his chances of succeeding to the throne if he did marry her, although it probably wouldn't help.

[Clive]

I thought so too.

[Clive]

What would be a more significant impediment would be his failure to realize that a cell phone is not a secure means of communication.

[MUDDOG]

Charles III will be a definite improvement over I & II.

[sheik yerbouty]

Somebody in the U.K. has to have some bollocks!

[mewzilla]

Not married the last time I knew. If they do get hitched, the CP-B would probably have to agree to a morganatic marriage, which means she could never be crowned as queen consort. If I understand this correctly. But I'd be interested to know if Chuckles actually used the term liberal democracy. As opposed to a conservative democracy, Chuckie? Hopefully, the queen will muzzle His Nibs before he can do any lasting damage.

[mewzilla]

If so, they are not to be found in the possession of any of the House Of Windsor's males.