Getty Images“None of us can change the past,” the king told federal leaders.
“The most painful aspects of our past continue to resonate,” King Charles III told Commonwealth leaders in Samoa this week, as debate over reparations and apologies for the slave trade rises again.
This has become an occupational hazard for the royal family, as they are unable to dispel questions about the long shadow of their historical links to slavery.
The issue becomes even more acute in forums like the Commonwealth Summit, which brings together leaders representing some of the countries most affected by the legacies of colonialism and slavery.
But even if the king had a personal belief that a symbolic apology or promise of reparations was necessary, he would not have been able to make it happen.
The monarch will speak on the advice of his ministers, but on matters of such political sensitivity his speech will have to stay within government policy.
In other words, he has to stick to the script.
A week ago, Downing Street signaled very clearly that there would be no apology or reparations agreement from the UK at the Samoa summit.
That meant that no matter what the king personally thought, anything he said about such historical wrongs would reflect the line set by the government.
“None of us can change the past,” the king said diplomatically, echoing Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s line that “we cannot change history.”
That didn’t stop the king from getting very close to the power lines.
Reuters
Prime Minister talks with Prime Minister: “It is the government that decides how much the monarch can say”
In Kenya last year, the king expressed his “deepest sadness and regret” over the wrongdoings of the colonial era.
In stronger terms than Samoa, he spoke of the “abhorrent and unjust acts of violence” committed against Kenyans during the independence struggle.
However, in line with government policy, there was nothing that could be identified as a clear apology.
When using “sorrow”, carefully avoid the word sorry. It was also used by then Prince Charles at the last Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Rwanda.
Interestingly, this most closely mirrors the British Prime Minister’s appearance in 2007, when Tony Blair formally expressed his “deep sadness and regret” over Britain’s role in the slave trade.
At the time, there were calls for Prime Minister Blair to go further, but he later said he was sorry.
Expressing “I’m sad” conveys emotion, but avoids the expectation of responsibility or compensation that comes with “I’m sorry.”
The King, as head of state, is the symbolic focus of calls for such redress, whether through financial reparations or other ways of addressing historical wrongs. It’s not going away.
That’s troubling, but he says it’s a political decision that cannot be changed, and with the current UK budget under extreme stress reparations for the past are unlikely. will accept it.
But there are also more complex questions about the extent to which the monarchy has closer responsibilities, both as a family and as an institution.
For example, the Royal African Company, founded in the 17th century under royal patronage, is claimed to have transported more slaves from Africa across the Atlantic than any other company.
However, just like humans, history can be full of contradictions.
When it came to Britain’s pioneering anti-slavery efforts in the early 19th century, research by historian Professor Suzanne Schwartz found that the royal family itself was divided.
George III’s nephew, the Duke of Gloucester, was one of the most important campaigners for the abolition of slavery, a vigorous opponent of the cruel trade, and a supporter of the Royal Navy’s efforts to stop slave ships. It was.
But before the royal family felt the clouds lifting, George III’s son, later William IV, was one of the most ardent defenders of slavery.
A gleaming silver service, known as the ‘Jamaica Service’ and owned by the Royal Collection Trust, still remains. It was a gift to the future King William IV by the people of Jamaica who wanted to thank him for his efforts to protect the slave trade.
Before becoming king, William IV was the Duke of Clarence, and the royal residence, Clarence House, is named after him.
Reuters
King Charles previously spoke of his ‘sadness’ over the slave trade
There have been attempts in other countries to draw a line on the issue of slavery.
The King of the Netherlands worked with the country’s prime minister to issue a formal apology.
But for King Charles and other senior royals, the issue remains in the background, especially when visiting former colonies or places affected by the slave trade.
Prince William and Duchess Kate’s trip to the Caribbean in 2022 was dogged by controversy over whether it felt too much like a colonial visit.
Any travel planner has to look at the traditional dancers and garlands and start having nightmares about how it will come across.
But the king, who has walked this political tightrope for decades, has steered a cautious path in Samoa.
“None of us can change the past, but we can learn its lessons and commit wholeheartedly to finding creative ways to correct the inequalities that persist,” he said. I did.
And in a speech that was widely seen as being about the legacy of slavery, he never actually mentioned slavery once.
