Commonwealth of Nations

Participating Countries: 56 States

By 2022, the list of "independent and equal" includes 56 states that formally have no obligations to each other, but adhere to the charter of the Commonwealth and recognize King Charles III as the head of the organization of Britain, and English as the language of the Commonwealth.

By 2023, the population of the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations exceeds two and a half billion people and, as stated by the "advertising booklets" of the Commonwealth, is one third of all humanity. Moreover, most of it is concentrated on the Indian subcontinent - Bangladesh (165 million people), Pakistan (229 million people) and India (1.35 billion people).

However, the largest contingent of countries in the Commonwealth still make up states Africa - 19 republics and two monarchies. At the same time European Union , there are only two of those members - and. Cyprus Malta

For the most part, the Commonwealth includes the former British colonies, but recently this factor cannot be called decisive. In particular, the charter of the organization, as a basis for joining the ranks of its members, implies a historical connection with the state, which is already such.

So, in June 2022, the former French colonies in Africa - Togo and Gabon - were accepted into the Commonwealth. Rwanda and Mozambique, which were not previously under the rule of the British crown, were also previously adopted.

The proviso that there is a historical connection with one of the current members generally provides extensive opportunities for the potential expansion of the Commonwealth at one time or another. For example, for 2023, the United States, Ireland, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Yemen or even Israel have a potential right to join. The same Rwanda and Mozambique have historical ties with Belgium and Portugal, whose colonies they once were, which allows them to fantasize in this direction even bolder.

In several countries, the majority of the population for 2023 wants to leave the commonwealth, for example, in the Solomon Islands, the Bahamas and Jamaica

Britain's instrument of globalism

It is generally accepted that for 2023 participation in the Commonwealth of Nations has for the most part a symbolic character for its members and is rather a tribute to tradition, but this is far from the case, the Rybar channel wrote.

First of all, this is a fairly well-working economic space, in which a number of countries are profitable. In fact, Britain managed to create a mechanism that does not require huge financial investments from it, but brings some benefit to almost all its participants - first of all, naturally, the British leadership.

True, it is also not worth overstating the economic attractiveness of the Commonwealth: the role of member countries for Britain as objects of investment has steadily decreased since the collapse of the empire in the 1960s. For comparison, in 1904-1913. About half of all overseas investments in the kingdom were in the countries of the British Empire, and already in the 1980s, the Commonwealth of Nations accounted for 40% of direct investment. In the early 2020s, Commonwealth countries are even less important compared to other investment centers.

At the same time, the Commonwealth plays a role in adjusting Britain to a new international environment, reinforcing its position in major international organizations. In addition, through the institutions of the Commonwealth, the British leadership directly interacts with the population and authorities of the member states, spreading their interests, as well as introducing the necessary views on issues significant for the former empire.

In this regard, the question arises - how does the UK leadership manage to maintain such a mechanism for many years, and even good to use it? After all, not for all members of the Commonwealth, the British rule was remembered as something positive or at least useful.

In this case, the main role is certainly played by the economic factor, which has a serious historical basis, which arose as the systems of British domination developed in the form of colonialism and neocolonialism.

At the same time, there is no better alternative for the potential reorganization of economic and public institutions in the Commonwealth countries for 2023 - in this regard, the mechanism continues to persist on its own, and not only thanks to the direct efforts of the British leadership. Although they play a significant role.

The situation is slightly different with members of the Commonwealth from among small island states - for example, countries of the Caribbean. In this case, the absence of the ability to independently close all its needs and ensure its independence plays an important role - and here Britain acts as a guarantor of the real survival of these state entities.

At the same time, the British leadership, as already noted above, does not indulge the members of the Commonwealth in excess funding, providing them for the most part with silent consent to carry out certain political actions. At the same time, the British authorities do not have a real economic need for most members of the Commonwealth, but expand it due to political necessity. A kind of principle is implemented in practice "if you do not control something, it is controlled by your competitor." In fact, it is required to establish direct or indirect control over the maximum number of territories, and ideally over all. Which, in fact, is globalism.

Control system

Interaction between the head of the organization in the person of the British monarch with numerous members of the Commonwealth is officially carried out with the help of several non-governmental organizations. These include:

• Commonwealth of Learning (based in Canada), responsible for the development of educational programs and promoting a grant system among the most vulnerable members of the Commonwealth;

• The Commonwealth Foundation - based directly at Marlborough House in London - is responsible for engaging with civil society representatives in Commonwealth countries;

Commonwealth Secretariat, which deals with the issues of ensuring unification, as well as being a link between the British leadership and other members.

Real management and interaction with territories goes both directly - through British officials of various levels or open investments - and indirectly. For example, through the leadership of the dominion countries, shadow financial transactions, as well as through international non-governmental organizations, many of which are not only originally created in Britain, but to this day receive tranches from the British treasury. These include:

• Amnesty International
• Oxfam
• Save the Children

History

1947: The Politics of Neocolonialism

After World War II, many colonies declared independence from Britain and the latter's power, not too persistently, left many of them, giving the national elite they formed independence. It is noteworthy that this did not affect the dominions, where the elite was initially predominantly British. Thus, the most significant territories somehow remained under British ownership, and the newly-minted "independent" states faced the need to exist independently, having lost all the preferences guaranteed by Britain and support in the sale of their own goods on key world markets.

The level of well-being of these states immediately fell - and very significantly, in connection with which their leadership began to return to interaction with the British on the terms of the latter. This period was called neocolonialism - a striking example in this case is the entry into the Commonwealth of many African and Caribbean states.

18th century: Politics of colonization

Now few people even remember how the system of colonialism was generally fixed in individual territories. For example, that primarily individual representatives of the British community (representatives of aristocratic surnames or missionary researchers close to them, the most famous of which is David Livingston) were sent to separate territories and established contacts with the local population.

The most common scenario involved establishing relationships with community leaders living in a tribal system. A characteristic feature of these communities was the acquisition of power by force (for example, in a duel). The British, establishing contact with such leaders, eventually actually offered them the option of leaving the power factor of power and gaining power permanently (and often inherited). This entailed strong and financial support for the ruling class of this or that community, from which the local aristocracy was subsequently formed, loyal to the British throne and obliged to it by its position.

Subsequently, these communities, with the help of the British Empire, acquired the status of state entities, and also became the platform for the activities of the first multinational corporation - the British East India Company. In return, the inhabitants of the new colonies were given the opportunity to sell their goods in the British Empire, as well as buy English goods at lower prices. By the way, in the same way, the British squeezed Spain on the territory of its own colonies, offering to buy goods (in quality - not inferior to the Spanish) much cheaper than competitors.

In fact, at that moment in time, the British created economic systems in the colonies (or modernized existing ones) in such a way that control over the sale of colonial goods somehow remained with them.