Worldwide sympathy for the death of Queen Elizabeth II is great. But the touching pictures of the royals and citizens in front of the palaces hide the fact that not everyone mourns the monarch. This has historical reasons - and current ones.
When nobody could have imagined that the eternal Queen Elizabeth II would one day be gone, a student campaign at the British University of Oxford made the headlines. In June 2021, students decided to hang a portrait of the monarch in a lounge. The reason: For some, the image of the monarch symbolizes "the recent colonial history" of Great Britain. Instead, a more neutral work of art should be hung, with which everyone - regardless of background - could feel comfortable.
The indignation at this insult to majesty was great. The then British Minister for Education, Gavin Williamson, rumbled and called the students' decision "absurd". The Queen is "the head of state and symbolizes the best of Britain". During her reign she worked "tirelessly" to "promote British values of tolerance, openness and respect around the world". For real? Those affected and historians are likely to see things differently.
In view of the death of the Queen a few days ago, in addition to the expressions of condolence and respect, critical voices are now being heard more and more. The main focus is on the colonial legacy of the royals. In an interview with Berlin's Tagesspiegel, Hamburg historian Jürgen Zimmerer accused the British royal family of "personally benefiting from colonialism." And further: "It's about values of millions of euros from exploitation." It has been "known for decades that precious stones from colonial raids are used in the crown jewels".
The professor at the University of Hamburg's global history department accused the late monarch of having "never made any critical comments about British colonialism." The British ruler committed colonial crimes in Malaysia, Kenya and Egypt in particular, explained the colonial history expert, adding: "It all happened during their tenure." The Queen was "decisively responsible for British politics".
In the colony of Malaysia, the British army committed war crimes, while in Kenya it brutally cracked down on the Mau Mau resistance movement, Zimmerer explained. Independence fighters and their families were locked up in concentration camps and tortured. And all in the months following the death of the Queen's father, King George VI. "There are now compensation judgments from courts in London," says the historian. In addition, Britain and France occupied the Suez Canal with a military intervention in 1956 after Egypt nationalized it. "All of this happened during her tenure, and she never took a critical stance on it later."
Criticism broke out quickly, especially on social media, after Elizabeth's death became known. Roughly every six days, a country celebrates its independence from Britain, commented one Twitter user. This occasion is the most widespread public holiday in the world. "Had the Queen apologized for slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism and called on the Crown to make reparations for the millions of lives sacrificed in her name, perhaps I would do the humane thing and feel bad," the university tweeted. Professor Mukoma Wa Ngugi. "As a Kenyan, I don't feel anything. This theater is absurd."
Kenya has been under British rule since 1895. It was officially declared a colony in 1920 and only gained independence in 1963, eleven years after Elizabeth II ascended the British throne. "The Queen's legacy began with colonialism and is still woven into it," Farooq Kperogi, a communications professor at Kennesaw State University in Georgia, told CNN. "No amount of compassion or sympathy that her death aroused can erase that."
It is also true that many states became independent during Elizabeth's long reign. It was a post-colonial era that the Queen helped shape. The former colonies from Asia, Africa and the Caribbean were merged into the Commonwealth, a loose federation that now consists of 56 sovereign states. The Queen - and now King Charles III. - are still heads of state of some of these states, the so-called Commonwealth Realms. Throughout her life, Elizabeth II worked to ensure that the group remained as a unit.
It is undisputed that the Queen has visited the African continent on numerous occasions and has spoken to the local leaders and citizens. In this context, the monarch is also perceived by some African observers as a stabilizing force that brought about a positive change towards more independence during her reign, reports CNN. You don't get a storm of jubilation or a standing ovation, but at least this was a step in the right direction. However, the monarch never initiated a broad public debate on the subject.
But the pressure to speak out about past atrocities and injustices in the name of colonialism is growing. This was made clear not least by the individual action at the University of Oxford. The debate was also fueled by allegations of racism related to Duchess Meghan, which she and her husband, Prince Harry, brought up themselves. And it was also the youngest son of King Charles III who, in July 2020, openly addressed the need for Commonwealth states to come to terms with their colonial past.
There are also individual states that are further breaking away from the British crown. Jamaica for example. And the Caribbean island state of Antigua and Barbuda, which only became independent in 1981, is to become a republic according to the will of the head of government. That was announced by Prime Minister Gaston Browne this weekend. Barbados is long past this process.
The British royal family seems to have understood that silence is no longer a solution. The younger generation in particular is trying to calm things down. In the spring, William and Kate embarked on an eight-day trip to the Caribbean. At times it was like running the gauntlet. The protests and critical overtones could not be ignored in Belize, Jamaica and the Bahamas. The royals did not remain silent either.
In Jamaica, where under British rule hundreds of thousands of people who had been abducted from Africa were exploited on sugar plantations, Prince William took the floor. At a state banquet, he called Britain's historic role in the slave trade "abhorrent" and described it as a "blot on our history". "I would like to express my deepest regrets," he said, without explicitly apologizing. Slavery "should never have happened". He pointed out that his father Charles had previously condemned slavery.
The points of criticism also include the fact that Great Britain repeatedly boasts that it abolished slavery as early as 1834, analyzes the German Press Agency. What is often not mentioned, however, is that this was accompanied by massive compensation for slave owners, which the country paid for until 2015. So far, however, there has been no financial compensation for the former slaves and their descendants.
CNN calls it a "complexity of the Queen's legacy" which, despite its great popularity in parts of the world where the British Empire had once spread, was also seen as a "symbol of oppression". Historian Zimmerer told the "Tagesspiegel": "I have a suspicion that she was so popular because she never stepped on anyone's toes. Except for her initial refusal to grant her a state funeral after Diana's death, but there she quickly gave in."
Criticism of Britain's colonial legacy is not necessarily linked to the person of the Queen, but to the British monarchy as such, said historian Matthew Smith in an interview with US broadcaster NBC. It is about the relationship of this institution to "systems of oppression, repression and forced exploitation of workers, especially African workers, as well as the exploitation of natural resources and the enforcement of control systems in these places," said the professor from University College London. "And that's a system that exists beyond the person of Queen Elizabeth."
(This article was first published on Sunday, September 11, 2022.)
