When Charles eventually leaves the throne, could the Commonwealth decide that it no longer needs a British monarch as its figurehead? What might replace that role? Will the Commonwealth continue?
I absolutely think [the] Commonwealth nations will look to replace the British monarch with a new figurehead. My sense is that many nations would already prefer to have a different kind of figurehead, for example a head who belongs to one of the 56 member states and is elected by member states for a set term. Alternatively, there could be some kind of “rolling” headship, whereby every member nation is invited to elect an official who will take a 12-month turn as head of the Commonwealth.
Whether or not the Commonwealth will continue is more difficult to say. Certainly one of the reasons it has survived until now is because of the energy and engagement of two British monarchs—Charles and Elizabeth II—who have viewed it as a potential force for good in the world. Without its connection to the British monarchy, it may lose what is left of its momentum. However, its survival also depends on wider geopolitical shifts: If individual governments within the Commonwealth view it as [a] useful arena for bringing together states who could benefit from closer association—be that economic, political, or military association—then it may continue long into the future.
There is an increasingly difficult conversation about Britain’s colonial past, slavery, and reparations. Charles has expressed personal sorrow over the slave trade, but the question of a formal apology remains politically and constitutionally complicated. How much freedom does the king actually have to address these issues, and could William take a different approach?
The king has very little freedom to apologize unless his government specifically sanctions and encourages such an apology. As the recent Caribbean tour made clear, I think Charles would prefer to strike a more nuanced line, reminding audiences that, despite the UK’s colonial past and its involvement in the horrors of slavery, Britain was one of the first major powers to abolish slavery and that it played an important role in bringing to an end the maritime trade in human chattel. Whether William takes a different approach will depend entirely on the UK government’s approach to formal apologies and reparations. My sense is that no government—at least not now or in the near-to-medium-term future—will agree to financial reparations, because historians, philosophers, and politicians are increasingly pushing back on such a solution, questioning why UK taxpayers (already under huge strain) should fork out huge sums for the wrongs committed by some of their ancestors more than two centuries ago.
