Elizabeth the Great

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

When the Union Jack, fluttering from the flagpole of Buckingham Palace, was gently lowered to half-mast, just after 6.30pm (BST), on Thursday, 8th September, the anxious wait of the nation for six hours was over and all hopes were dashed. From the time an announcement was made from Buckingham Palace just after 12.30pm that Her Majesty was gravely ill, the nation feared the worst, but hoped for the best. As the notice announcing the death of Queen Elizabeth was being posted on the gates of Buckingham Palace, the autumn showers, bathing London from morning, eased off and a ray of sunshine emanated through the thick dark clouds, dominating the western skies forming a rainbow over the Union Jack fluttering, lazily, half-mast. The much-loved Queen was no more!

Queen Elizabeth II was the most famous woman, perhaps the most famous person, in the whole world, and much had been written about her. When I wrote an article on the occasion of her celebrating an unprecedented Platinum Jubilee (A Queen Unmatched, The Island 23rd April) I never imagined I would be writing again on her, so soon. More so, because just two days before, she was seen with all smiles, bidding farewell to her 14th Prime Minister and welcoming the 15th. How uncertain life is!

I wish to highlight some of her unique achievements and defend her from some of the unfair accusations made. Unfortunately, most hurting for her, some these came from within; first from Diana and then from Megan. A few have endured so much they seem to have come to be regarded as true. Perhaps, unfortunately, the royal tradition is not to use the right of reply and Her Majesty has famously stated “Don’t complain – Don’t explain!”

In an excellent editorial, titled “Death of a great leader” (The Island, 10th September), whilst paying a glowing tribute to Queen Elizabeth, the editor has stated:

“Great as she was, Queen Elizabeth II was not infallible. Her handling of some of her family affairs came in for criticism, as in the case of the Diana controversy, which had an adverse effect on the reputation of Buckingham Palace. A much-publicised claim by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, in an interview with Oprah Winfrey, earlier this year, that Buckingham Palace’s decision to deny Archie the title of Prince had been driven by institutional racism, within the monarchy, also reflected badly on the Queen, who, however, remained unfazed. Despite such blemishes, as it were, and what her critics may say, all in all, her reign was hugely successful and stood Britain in good stead.”

Unfortunately, Princess Diana was being manipulated by many including journalists, and the then PM Tony Blair, who wanted to showcase Diana as the face of the new monarchy. With the resounding majority he received, Tony Blair may have thought that he could reform the monarchy, too. His wife declared that she did not intend curtsy to the queen. Apparently, Her Majesty cut him down to size, stating at their first meeting “You are my 10th Prime Minister. The first was Winston. That was before you were born”. Perhaps, this made Blair’s resolve even greater but, to his credit, he gave sound advice to the Queen, following the death of Diana.

Diana’s sudden death evoked mass hysteria, more so because the media made her a saint in spite of many indiscreet liaisons, and made Charles a pariah because of his public admission that he had a liaison with Camilla, after his marriage had broken down, irretrievably. The Queen was in Balmoral, consoling her two young grandsons, who had lost their mother. The resultant delayed return to Buckingham Palace evoked public criticism and generated newspaper headlines. Added to that, Mohamed Al-Fayed was making wild accusations that the monarchy was instrumental in murdering Diana, and his son Dodi, who, by the way, was carrying-on with Diana, whilst having an American girlfriend! ‘Operation Paget’, the Metropolitan police inquiry, headed by Lord Stevens, established that it was a tragic accident. An interesting fact that was disclosed during the inquiry was that both Diana and Dodi may have survived the crash had they worn seat belts. The only survivor was the security officer, the only person to wear a seat belt. Al-Fayed disagreed with the inquiry report but had to stop slandering once the coroner’s inquest was concluded, in April 2008, when the jury returned the verdict that Diana and Fayed were unlawfully killed as a result of “gross negligence” of the driver Henri Paul and the paparazzi.

The Oprah Winfrey interview, with the Sussexes, turned out to be a publicity stunt where Oprah demonstrated a total lack of tough questioning she is renowned for. Had she done her research, she could have brought to their attention “letters patent dated 20 November 1917 by King George V” when the accusation was made that Archie was denied the title ‘Prince’ because of institutional racism within the monarchy. Archie was not entitled to be a prince as the ‘letters patent’ restricted the title of Prince to the children of the sovereign, the children of the sovereign’s sons, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. They forgot to mention that the Queen conferred an appropriate title which they refused. Megan stated that they requested this title for security purposes. The fact is that security does not depend on the title but on the basis of individual assessments made by the security services. She also stated that Charles will deny Archie the title. In spite of the atrocious campaign carried out, sometime ago by Diana supporters, to skip a generation and make William the king, Charles has become King and we have Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet! What a pity that a publicity seeking American actress, not a Hollywood actress even of B-grade but a minor one who acted in some TV series, who got married to a Prince, has done so much of reputational damage to the British Monarchy?

The Queen is far from being a racist. In fact, when in 1961 she danced with Ghana’s first President Kwame Nkrumah at a farewell reception, it was the racist segment of the British populace that was infuriated. Though the Netflix series ‘The Crown’ tried portray it as ‘the dance that changed history’, it probably is an exaggeration. Nkrumah remained a socialist till he was deposed, but this dance may well have catalysed the process of many African countries joining the Commonwealth.

The other Prime Minister the Queen did not get on well with was Margaret Thatcher. It is well known that Her Majesty was concerned about Thatcherite policies causing social upheaval. In fact, Thatcher had once commented that if the Queen had the vote, she would probably vote for Social-Democrats! This makes it obvious that though born to riches, Her Majesty felt the pulse of the poor. But the main disagreement was about sanctions on South Africa. Thatcher found excuses not to impose sanctions, perhaps because her husband had business interests but, ultimately, the Queen prevailed and sanctions were imposed which facilitated the dismantling of apartheid. This was the reason for the close association between the Queen and Nelson Mandela.

The British Commonwealth was started by the Queen’s father and she transformed it to be the powerful organization, the Commonwealth of Nations. When she became Queen, there were eight members and, at the time of her death, the number stood at 56 countries, from all inhabited continents, with a combined population of 2.4 billion. All the English-speaking countries are members, except the USA, which, in a way, is an advantage as the USA would have distorted the Commonwealth. Still, some Americans seem to be looking upon Britain as the ‘mother country’ as stated by a couple from California who were laying flowers at Buckingham Palace. Interestingly, four African countries, that were not under British rule, too, have opted to join the Commonwealth. Mozambique, formerly under Portugal, joined in 1995, and Rwanda, formerly under Germany, and then the Netherlands, joined in 2009. Gabon and Togo, both formerly under France, joined on 29th June 2022. Many others have applied to join which dispels the accusation that the British Monarchy is racist. As suggested by the Queen, King Charles has taken over the responsibility of heading the Commonwealth.

The Queen has shown an abiding interest in Sri Lanka. Victoria Dam was a British gift, under the patronage of Her Majesty. A former Sri Lanka High Commissioner to the UK told me how, on two occasions, during largely attended diplomatic receptions, the Queen came looking for him to inquire how we are coping after the 2004 Tsunami and how our Cricket team was faring after the 2009 attack in Pakistan. In spite of all this, some ‘liberal’ commentators have taken objections to flying the Sri Lankan flag half-mast and having a National Day of Mourning because we are a republic. These narrow-minded experts are a minority, fortunately. Judging by the reactions across the world, these measures are more than justified.

Monuments across the world were illuminated in the Queen’s honour, including ‘Christ, the Redeemer, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Politicians, around the world, have been paying tribute, the best coming from President Macron of France. In spite of the traditional Franco-British rivalry and derogatory personal references by Liz Truss, during the leadership campaign, President Macron responded with magnanimity. While conveying his condolences to the British people, he stated: “To you, she is your Queen but to us, she is THE Queen”! No one could have better described the high esteem with which Queen Elizabeth was held around the world.

According to the British regnal system she is Queen Elizabeth, the Second but she was second to none. She was the most successful British Monarch ever. Therefore, I, too, join the clamour that the best way to honour this magnificent lady is by calling her “Elizabeth, the Great!”