Ideas of the Family in the Commonwealth and Africa
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Royal Holloway - Pure ‘Rather a special family of nations’: Ideas of the family in the Commonwealth and Africa. Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in Politics and International Relations at Royal Holloway University of London Lyn Johnstone September 2016 1 Declaration of Authorship I, Lyn Johnstone, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. Signed: ____ ____ Date: ______September 2016_________ 2 Abstract Since the days of Empire, Britain has employed familial discourse, often with negative connotations, to describe her relationship with her colonies. In the nineteenth century the idea, put forward by the British, that the Empire was a family blurred the lines between the domestic and the international arenas. This practice of familial discourse continues today, albeit in something of a different form, as Britain and the fifty-two states, which make up membership of the intergovernmental organisation known as the Commonwealth, frequently refer to themselves as a family of nations. From the vantage point of the twenty-first century, the Commonwealth and its familial rhetoric might seem outdated, even anachronistic; yet, the notion of the Commonwealth as a ‘family’ continues to endure and is used liberally by the Head of the Commonwealth (the Queen), the Commonwealth Secretary General, and Commonwealth Heads of Government during their biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings. When a group of post-colonial states and their former coloniser continue to refer to themselves as family, what is the significance of this label? Is it simply a way for smaller, less powerful states to cement ties with richer, more powerful ones? Perhaps, a way for former colonial powers to hold on to some semblance of power? Or is there some kind of legitimacy behind this rhetoric, that positions the Commonwealth, in the eyes of its member states, as analogous to an actual family? These questions form the puzzle at the heart of this thesis. In attempting to answer these questions, the thesis combines historical and theoretical analysis with empirical evidence to consider African understandings of the Commonwealth in order to question whether a familial metaphor, employed in the nineteenth century to bring the idea of the wider Empire home to the British, is anything more than an empty signifier for post-colonial Commonwealth states today. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 6 1. Introduction: Rather a special family of nations? 8 1.1 Introduction 9 1.1.1 The Commonwealth 12 1.1.2 The Commonwealth family 16 1.2 Cosmopolitanism and communitarianism 20 1.2.1 The communitarian family 24 1.2.2 Cosmopolitan organisation? 26 1.3 Commonwealth literature and its discontents 28 1.4 Methods and methodological influences 35 1.5 Plan of chapters 41 2. Mapping the family: From Empire to Commonwealth 44 2.1 The ideology of a Greater Britain and the ideology of the family 47 2.2 The changing family role: From Empire to decolonisation 53 2.3 The family motif: ‘Rather a special family of nations’ 57 2.4 Bonds of affection: The relationship with the Queen 60 2.5 Conclusions 67 3. Mystical ties and invisible unions: The Commonwealth through a communitarian lens 70 3.1 Communitarianism: The idea of community 73 3.2 The communitarian Commonwealth 80 3.2.1 Continuity and distinctiveness 83 3.3 Troubling communitarianism, troubling the Commonwealth 88 3.4 Conclusions 95 4. ‘Intimations of a desirable future’: The Commonwealth’s cosmopolitan turn 98 4.1 Foundations of a cosmopolitan future 103 4.2 The Commonwealth’s cosmopolitanism: A sketch of the arguments 108 4.3 Conclusions: Looking forward/looking back 115 4 5. Zimbabwe and the family ties that bind 118 5.1 Background: Family history 126 5.2 Positionality: British-Zimbabwean relations 132 5.3 Zimbabwe: In the family way 139 5.3.1 You can never really leave a family 140 5.3.2 Brotherly betrayals… 145 5.3.3 Return to the fold? 150 5.4 Conclusions: The trouble with family 152 6. Rwanda and the cosmopolitan Commonwealth 154 6.1 Background: Rwanda’s accession 161 6.2 The Commonwealth effect on Rwanda 169 6.2.1 ‘Starting from zero’ 175 6.2.2 Interests and opportunities 178 6.2.3 Shared values 181 6.2.4 Forced idealisation? 182 6.3 Rwanda’s effect on the Commonwealth 184 6.4 Conclusions: Rwanda as cosmopolitan exemplar? 187 7. Conclusion 190 Bibliography 201 5 Acknowledgements This thesis has benefited from discussion and debate with countless people, but one in particular deserves my greatest and most heartfelt thanks. Julia Gallagher has taught me most of what I know about International Relations and African politics either by imparting her own wisdom or connecting me to other experts in the field. I have met few people so gifted with the capacity to blend acute insight with unstinting generosity. Her patience, wisdom, and insightful comments have helped shape this thesis with the lightest of touches. I am forever indebted to her for taking on the task of ironing out the kinks in an aspiring academic who is now, I hope, much less rough around the edges, and much less afraid of leaping off metaphorical research cliffs. It is difficult to overstate the value of endless conversations with academics and friends in the Politics and International Relations department, as well as Africanists in other departments, at Royal Holloway, who have pushed my thinking along, making contributions that I didn’t absorb until long after our conversations, but there are four people in particular who I would like to extend a special thanks. Firstly, I am grateful to Sandra Halperin who considerably sharpened my approach to methodology. Her enthusiasm for my project was always appreciated and her insightful questions and comments often helped push my thinking in new directions; whatever my future research career, I will never forget my roadmap. Secondly, Chris Rumford’s work on cosmopolitanism made centuries of work on this vast and often erratic theory accessible. His unfaltering enthusiasm around my attempts to tackle cosmopolitan memory, beyond the European frame, will always be appreciated, even though that chapter did not make the final cut. He will be sorely missed. Finally, I am especially grateful to Antara Datta and Marie Gilbert for giving a very rough version of the thesis a thorough reading and supplying me with some extremely thorough and honest feedback. This gave the thesis the final shape that it needed. This thesis would not have been possible without the generous financial assistance of Royal Holloway University and the University of London, who furnished me with a scholarship, and three additional travel grants. The Politics and International Relations Department at Royal Holloway provided a rich and fruitful environment in which to study, argue, and share ideas. I would like to thank Ben O’Loughlin for taking me to the House of Lords to listen to the 6 Commonwealth ‘soft power’ debate. I would also like to thank Nicholas Allen for his feedback on teaching and the administrative staff in the Politics and International Relations department, in particular Sarah Sanders, who tirelessly helped with expenses and room bookings for conferences. Finally, a special thank you to my examiners Rahul Rao, from SOAS, and Will Jones, from Royal Holloway, whose enthusiasm and constructive criticism have helped me to take the first step towards turning the thesis into a book. I want to express my sincere gratitude for the enthusiasm and assistance provided by the many and necessarily anonymous interviewees who provided vital information. Without their generosity, the empirical part of the thesis would not have taken shape. Outside of the research, but no less important to shaping my thoughts and observations, there are a number of people who deserved special mention. In Rwanda: thanks go to Andy Fearn, for providing some initial contacts that got the interview ball rolling, and Eugene for the endless enthusiasm and new angles through which to view the after-effects of British colonialism and the useful and insightful comparisons between the Commonwealth and the Francophonie. In Zimbabwe: a very special thanks to Patrick Otto, for having the patience and grace to listen to my stories, while we discussed the world and all the problems in it. I am indebted to his kindness and understanding. To Innocent, who found me on a park bench in Harare and took a chance that I was not an old Rhodesian – and through a chance meeting connected me with some interesting and inspiring people who helped me to understand a little better the complexities of the Commonwealth family. And, finally, to Shelter, who trusted me with her story and gave me an insight into life in Zimbabwe, and Patrice and Aad, for dragging me away from my laptop and taking me to Bulawayo, where I was able to get out from behind the research and see the beautiful hills of Motopos. Finally, I owe a large debt of gratitude to my family and friends, who were never quite sure what I was doing, but were always there to lend support. A special thanks goes to Tricia Logan for the reality checks, coffee breaks, and endless puns on the family, all sandwiched around serious discussion and debate about colonialism. To Lukas Molthof who has been like a brother, always patiently listening to my endless stories of travel and drama. I owe the greatest debt of gratitude to my wife Jennifer for her tolerance, love, and encouragement, and for having the patience to read paragraphs out of context.