Should Ireland join the Commonwealth

Artful_Badger · 22-04-2014 12:39pm #1

According to British MP Michael Fabricant Ireland should be invited to join the commonwealth as the next step in committing to peaceful reconciliation.

This is being discussed in AH at the usual AH standard. But I'd like to know the real upsides and downsides are to such a move.

From what he says in the article the commonwealth now "is founded on co-operation between English-speaking states with shared histories and legal systems."

So it wouldn't be rejoining the empire are so many see it. But would it actually be of benefit beyond just being a symbol of peace by adding Ireland to a list and having a bit of a ceremony ?

glued · 22-04-2014 12:42pm

I don't really see the advantage to it. It's an outdated concept with little or no advantages at this stage.

turnikett1 · 22-04-2014 12:42pm

Artful_Badger wrote: »

So it wouldn't be rejoining the empire are so many see it. But would it actually be of benefit beyond just being a symbol of peace by adding Ireland to a list and having a bit of a ceremony ?

Nope. I am all for peace, reconciliation and coming to terms with the past but between inviting royals to the centenary 1916 commemoration and THIS, its just a bit too far. C'mon like. If this attitude keeps carrying on I honestly feel Ireland re-joining the UK in some 30 years or so isn't the craziest thing ever

Artful_Badger · 22-04-2014 12:48pm

turnikett1 wrote: »

Nope. I am all for peace, reconciliation and coming to terms with the past but between inviting royals to the centenary 1916 commemoration and THIS, its just a bit too far. C'mon like. If this attitude keeps carrying on I honestly feel Ireland re-joining the UK in some 30 years or so isn't the craziest thing ever

Too far in what way though ? The past is the past as far as I'm concerned and if its in the best interests of the state and people to join the commonwealth why should it be dismissed because of sentiment or resentment over historical events.

Godge · 22-04-2014 12:54pm

It is an interesting idea but not a new one.

Those genuinely interested in a united Ireland have previously floated the idea as a compromise i.e Ireland is united but rejoins the Commonwealth.

turnikett1 · 22-04-2014 1:15pm

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Too far in what way though ? The past is the past as far as I'm concerned and if its in the best interests of the state and people to join the commonwealth why should it be dismissed because of sentiment or resentment over historical events.

It hasn't even been 100 years since Ireland got it's independence, and only 65 since we left the Commonwealth! There are absolutely 0 benefits to rejoining the Commonwealth apart from symbolism and "peace" (which we already have). Ireland has proven itself an independent nation capable of handling itself on an international scale and has built a strong cultural identity distinct from the UK and the rest of Europe. I really just don't see the reason why we should start sucking up to the Brits again (not that we don't already). Inviting royals to the commemoration is too far for me. Yes peace and reconciliation, but some things are a bit sacred.

I'm not even overly patriotic. I'm not in favour of the current Irish government or any of their previous and probably future incarnations. But between Irish people following English clubs, watching English tv, the Irish media going crazy about royal babies and visits to the Queen, the fact we all speak English and the Union Jack still flies somewhere on this island is it not enough?

I don't know, maybe I'm ranting and completely wrong but just let Ireland be Ireland. Ireland and the UK can be friends sure, I am up for that, but at least let us have some CULTURAL independence. Irish culture is imbued with British culture enough as it is. Last thing we need is us having the Queen as our Head of State and having royals "remember" our freedom fighters. Even the thought of some poncy royal with their heads down in silence, probably thinking "what a lovely procession" as we commemorate the Rising makes me a little bit sick.

I agree re-joining the Commonwealth is harmless symbolism. But it's the completely wrong type of symbolism.

Maphisto · 22-04-2014 1:29pm

I don't really know enough about it but I have always joined clubs - especially when there was no or minimal entrance fee.

Given that it is no longer a requirement to accept the Queen as head of state (rest easy Michael D) and there are three other members of the EEC already in the Commonwealth, I think that chance to network with other leaders could only be good.

But there's an awful lot of baggage and symbolism too - and I wouldn't even go there.

SpaceTime · 22-04-2014 1:33pm

I would rather see more cooperation between Ireland and the UK & the Scottish, Northern Irish & Welsh governments on a range of practical issues like maybe a common visa system if both countries are determined to stay out of the shengen system.

The commonwealth comes with WAY too much baggage.

The key here is a relationship between modern Ireland and modern Britain, not with a relic of colonialism.

We have a lot more in common as we are now without dwelling on the colonial era.

delthedriver · 22-04-2014 1:41pm

Any money, grants, cheap loans , jobs etc........ going with the deal ?

Ren2k7 · 22-04-2014 2:14pm

There's no obvious benefits to joining, so no.

alastair · 22-04-2014 5:47pm

Now that the Commonwealth Institute in Kensington is being turned into the new home for the Design Museum, there's not even a cool HQ. Track and field athletes might get a few more gigs?

Artful_Badger · 22-04-2014 5:49pm

Well if there's no real benefit beyond making a statement I'd agree it doesnt make much sense in joining.

For Reals · 22-04-2014 6:48pm

There's no sense in joining the antiquated remnants of a fascist empire built on the blood of other nations utilising concentration camps and genocide to ensure expansion and continuity, so we can all be pals and have tea and cake. It's ridiculous. They can keep it. Ask them to join the G.A.A.?

SpaceTime · 22-04-2014 7:44pm

...., so we can all be pals and have tea and cake. It's ridiculous. They can keep it. Ask them to join the G.A.A.?

Careful! The Royals like being patrons of things, particularly sporting organisations !!

Maphisto · 22-04-2014 7:44pm

For Reals wrote: »

There's no sense in joining the antiquated remnants of a fascist empire built on the blood of other nations utilising concentration camps and genocide to ensure expansion and continuity, so we can all be pals and have tea and cake. It's ridiculous. They can keep it. Ask them to join the G.A.A.?

Except we were talking about the Commomwealth and nobody has been offered cake.

Are you offering membership of the GAA?

ZeitgeistGlee · 22-04-2014 7:46pm

delthedriver wrote: »

Any money, grants, cheap loans , jobs etc........ going with the deal ?

Nope, although IIRC they want to try to add a FTA element to it the same as the EU which might make it somewhat appealing.

If the UK forget about that €3 billion they unilaterally loaned us a few years ago I imagine people would be far more amicable to the idea.

Marhay70 · 22-04-2014 10:25pm

Rejoin the Commonwealth? no; rejoin the UK? now that's worth considering.

ZeitgeistGlee · 22-04-2014 10:42pm

Marhay70 wrote: »

Rejoin the Commonwealth? no; rejoin the UK? now that's worth considering.

Populist sentiment renders any discussion on that moot.

riffmongous · 22-04-2014 11:17pm

Marhay70 wrote: »

Rejoin the Commonwealth? no; rejoin the UK? now that's worth considering.

Why?

Fratton Fred · 22-04-2014 11:27pm

glued wrote: »

I don't really see the advantage to it. It's an outdated concept with little or no advantages at this stage.

In what way is it outdated?

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 11:17am

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

Populist sentiment renders any discussion on that moot.

Can you find any popular support for discussion on such an issue? Thats ike suggesting that the US doesn't rejoin the Commonwealth because "populist sentiment renders the discussion moot".

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 11:23am

Fratton Fred wrote: »

In what way is it outdated?

It doesn't deal with any of the underlying issues within the Commonwealth, like failures in Democracy in the African nations, discrimination (how many Commonwealth nations are in a race to make being Gay a death sentence?), religious intolerance, child marriages, FGM, corruption, military dictatorships (remember how quickly Musharraf was back in after 9/11 even though he lead a coup?), educational issues particularly regarding gender equality etc.

You have a combination of Western Nations (UK and the Dominions), African nations (who balk at most Western views/criticisms) and Asian nations (many Islamic with significantly different views to the West). Trying to find common policies/positions between those groups is almost impossible.

Other than being a talking shop point out what the Commonwealth actually does?

alastair · 23-04-2014 11:41am

sparky42 wrote: »

It doesn't deal with any of the underlying issues within the Commonwealth, like failures in Democracy in the African nations, discrimination (how many Commonwealth nations are in a race to make being Gay a death sentence?), religious intolerance, child marriages, FGM, corruption, military dictatorships (remember how quickly Musharraf was back in after 9/11 even though he lead a coup?), educational issues particularly regarding gender equality etc.

You have a combination of Western Nations (UK and the Dominions), African nations (who balk at most Western views/criticisms) and Asian nations (many Islamic with significantly different views to the West). Trying to find common policies/positions between those groups is almost impossible.

Other than being a talking shop point out what the Commonwealth actually does?

You could make equally valid criticisms of the UN. Surely better to have a forum that provides debate on the issues than to stand outside harping?

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 11:49am

alastair wrote: »

You could make equally valid criticisms of the UN. Surely better to have a forum that provides debate on the issues than to stand outside harping?

And we are in the UN which for all its ills (and you are right about that) is still a more effective entity than the Commonwealth. There is no debate in the Commonwealth, the UK and Dominions don't push because of a combination of historic guilt in the case of the UK and fear of fracturing the Commonwealth from all of them, the Africans particularly respond to any Western position as Neo-Colonalism(look at any of the languages in relation to the Anti Gay laws at the moment).

alastair · 23-04-2014 12:04pm

sparky42 wrote: »

There is no debate in the Commonwealth.

Well - that's not true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15524013

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 12:10pm

alastair wrote: »

Well - that's not true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15524013

That's the UK threatening to taking an action outside of and seperate to the Commonwealth, it's not like he called for a commonwealth meeting or statement on that law or any of the other similar laws being moved in Africa at the moment. When the Commonwealth meets and all nations put forward such a threat then I'd see it as a Commonwealth action or if the Secretary General or Chairperson issued such a statement. But they've been silent on the matter.

alastair · 23-04-2014 12:26pm

sparky42 wrote: »

That's the UK threatening to taking an action outside of and seperate to the Commonwealth, it's not like he called for a commonwealth meeting or statement on that law or any of the other similar laws being moved in Africa at the moment. When the Commonwealth meets and all nations put forward such a threat then I'd see it as a Commonwealth action or if the Secretary General or Chairperson issued such a statement. But they've been silent on the matter.

Not quite.

Mr Cameron told the BBC he had raised the issue of gay rights at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, in Perth, Australia, last week.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 12:31pm

alastair wrote: »

Not quite.

And what was the outcome? Don't remember it producing any great debate, were there any statements from the Secretary General or Commissioner on it? While he might of raised the issue of Gay Rights, I'm fairly sure he wouldn't have tried to get the Commonwealth to suspend a member over Gay Rights, or cut Commonwealth funding from that nation over it. More likely it would have been the same type of PR comment that every Western leader does about Chinese Human Rights (ie a one liner and then move on to more important matters)

The Commonwealth itself has admitted that it has issues dealing with the whole area of human rights within the Commonwealth in the past, the response more committees to review the results of the last committees.

alastair · 23-04-2014 12:34pm

sparky42 wrote: »

And what was the outcome? Don't remember it producing any great debate, were there any statements from the Secretary General or Commissioner on it? While he might of raised the issue of Gay Rights, I'm fairly sure he wouldn't have tried to get the Commonwealth to suspend a member over Gay Rights, or cut Commonwealth funding from that nation over it. More likely it would have been the same type of PR comment that every Western leader does about Chinese Human Rights (ie a one liner and then move on to more important matters)

The Commonwealth itself has admitted that it has issues dealing with the whole area of human rights within the Commonwealth in the past, the response more committees to review the results of the last committees.

Not disputing any of the above - but it's clearly not true to say that "There is no debate in the Commonwealth." Has anyone attempted to suspend a UN member state over gay rights btw?

WakeUp · 23-04-2014 12:41pm

So according to this guy the way to celebrate peace is for Ireland to be allowed not invited to join the British commonwealth, thanks for the chuckle Michael but youre alright. I can think of many more ways to celebrate peace than this I find his attitude a little condescending. Things are fine just the way they are the chances of Ireland ever joining the commonwealth are as remote as the chances of ever joining the UK personally I cant see it ever happening. Taking a look at some of his comments...

“If a country like the Republic of Ireland joined the Commonwealth,"

The correct and official term is Ireland not the Republic of Ireland as outlined in our constitution he doesnt elaborate on what he means by "like" would be interesting if he did.

what greater message could be sent to countries facing political upheaval and disputes on the other side of the world than an ancient country who had drawn a line under parts of its past,

Sending a message to the other side of the world is about as ridiculous an idea as celebrating peace as a reason for Ireland to rejoin the commonwealth.

whilst promoting its future on the best parts of its heritage?” Mr Fabricant writes.

Promoting our future on the best parts of heritage again would be interesting if he elaborated further on that. what are the best parts of our heritage I wonder Michael.

Times have certainly moved on to the benefit of everyone we have a good working relationship with Britain as it is, we have peace people are getting on with their lives things are better now so just leave them alone. Fabricants idea to me is nonsense really.

sparky42 · 23-04-2014 12:42pm

alastair wrote: »

Not disputing any of the above - but it's clearly not true to say that "There is no debate in the Commonwealth." Has anyone attempted to suspend a UN member state over gay rights btw?

Not that I know of and with Russia on the Security council it wouldn't happen anyway.

But since the commonwealth refused to take up the recommendations of the 2011 review that included repealing the anti Homosexuality laws, and banning Forced Marriages and the creation of a Commissioner for Human Rights I'd say there is at least as active a resistance as elements of the UN towards Human Rights.

Should Ireland join the Commonwealth

Comments