In George Bernard Shaw’s prophetic comedy The Apple Cart, a fictional King Magnus fights an attempt by Prime Minister Proteus to deprive him of the right to influence public opinion through the press. He wants a cipher for a sovereign. The King threatens to abdicate and stand for election himself, in the knowledge that the British monarchy is more popular than any dreary or opportunist politician.
Back in the real world, the royals are supposed to “never complain, never explain.” Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II is famous for her discretion and dutifully dull pronouncements. Yet her heir, Prince Charles, has been taking a leaf out of King Magnus’ book.
He has been telling “friends” that the government’s controversial policy of deporting to Rwanda asylum seekers and migrants who have been smuggled illegally into Britain is “appalling,” the Times of London reported.
The number of migrants who have crossed the Channel from France in tiny, unseaworthy vessels since 2018 has risen above 50,000, with more than 10,000 so far this year, government figures showed.
The scheme to fly them to Rwanda is intended to act as a deterrent to others — and give reassurance to voters that the Tories’ claim to protect Britain’s borders can be translated into practice.
The senior leadership of the Church of England has already denounced the plan as an “immoral policy that shames Britain,” but it is traditional for the bishops to elide their liberal political views with the Bible against the Tories. Not so the monarchy, which usually avoids a scrap with No. 10.
Prince Charles’ office at Clarence House has not denied his remarks, although a spokesperson said that “he remains politically neutral.”
This is constitutionally the case, but not in actual fact.
The Prince of Wales is known to chafe against his restraints. That is only human for a 73-year-old man who has been kept waiting for the top job for decades.
Yet his mother’s superhuman silence on the burning issues of the day is also what endears her to her people and prevents schisms deepening around the royals for all their foibles and pratfalls.
It might not be long before Charles III takes the place of the 96-year-old Elizabeth II. So the unpalatable fate that beckons is that he must learn to be dull, too.
The Prince might think that British Prime Minister Boris Johnson — the wily latter-day Proteus in this drama — is on the backfoot after the Partygate scandals and the subsequent resignation of his second ethics adviser, Christopher Geidt, last week.
Ironically, Geidt was ousted by Prince Charles and his scapegrace brother Prince Andrew from his previous job as the queen’s chief adviser when he tried to restrict their freedoms too tenaciously.
Still, Geidt’s advice holds good. The heir to the throne would be wise not to needlessly antagonize his prime minister — Johnson has seen off most of his critics during his turbulent career and notoriously holds a grudge.
Johnson also has friends. The tabloid press are cheerleaders for the Rwanda policy. They regard Prince Charles’ enthusiasm for fads such as homoeopathy and organic food as eccentric. In a cost-of-living crisis, more than one commentator has observed that organic food is good to eat, provided you have a princely income.
It was thought that Charles had learned his lesson 10 years ago after it was revealed that he was in the habit of sending “black spider” letters — named after his idiosyncratic spiraling script — offering advice to ministers on matters from environmentalism to planning rules.
A freedom of information request by the Guardian forced their publication. The paper wrote that “the letters show behind the curtain, most of the time, Prince Charles behaves more as a bit of a bore on behalf of his good causes than as any sort of wannabe feudal tyrant.”
However, the letters might be seen as harbingers of problematic royal behavior.
Take the timing of the prince’s latest apparent intervention: The European Court of Human Rights last week stopped the government’s first official flight to Rwanda on the tarmac to deliberate the legality of the policy. Tory lawmakers and their press friends were furious.
By no coincidence, Charles next week heads off to Rwanda, which hosts the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.
The UN High Commissioner has praised Rwanda’s record on taking refugees from other war-torn African countries. Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who brought peace to his country after the genocidal attacks on the Tutsis in the 1990s, has long been a poster boy for British aid.
However, critics say his recent human rights record has been “appalling,” too.
The government’s policy does divide political opinion along sharp lines. A majority of Conservative voters and Brexit supporters are in favor of the ￡120 million (US$146.9 million) scheme, while Labour voters and Remainers generally oppose it.
The latest opinion poll for the Tony Blair Institute showed that more than half suspect that the scheme will not work.
Israel and Denmark have tried to offshore asylum seekers without success, although the EU pays Libya to detain migrants and asylum seekers in miserable detention camps.
Refugee and immigration policy remains a hot-button issue for voters, and the latter was a major factor behind the Brexit vote, so Charles should keep out.
Britain has only just emerged from the divisions created by the toxic EU referendum campaign. The nation a fortnight ago celebrated 70 years of the queen’s reign in a display of unity that impressed many foreign observers plagued by partisan politics of their own.
Geidt’s advice is going unheeded by both his former masters. Earlier this month, Prince Andrew, now disgraced by his former association with the convicted sex traffickers Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, tried to barge his way back into the limelight. It was only the threat of a walkout by Prince William, Charles’ eldest son, that got his uncle pulled from a royal lineup.
Like it or not, Prince Charles must act as his brother’s keeper.
At the conclusion of The Apple Cart, the prime minister backs down — but the ultimate contest between king and the political class is left unresolved.
The Prince of Wales, seeking a succession that would reassure as well as invigorate, needs to perfect the hardest act of all for a natural intervener: minding the “firm’s” business, not everyone else’s.
Martin Ivens is the editor of the Times Literary Supplement. Previously, he was editor of the Sunday Times of London and its chief political commentator.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As it has striven toward superiority in most measures of the Asian military balance, China is now ready to challenge the undersea balance of power, long dominated by the United States, a decisive advantage crucial to its ability to deter blockade and invasion of Taiwan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). America expended enormous treasure to develop the technology, logistics, training, and personnel to emerge victorious in the Cold War undersea struggle against the former Soviet Union, and to remain superior today; the US is not used to considering the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)
The annual summit of East Asia and other events around the ASEAN summit in October and November every year have become the most important gathering of leaders in the Indo-Pacific region. This year, as Laos is the chair of ASEAN, it was privileged to host all of the ministerial and summit meetings associated with ASEAN. Besides the main summit, this included the high-profile East Asia Summit, ASEAN summits with its dialogue partners and the ASEAN Plus Three Summit with China, Japan and South Korea. The events and what happens around them have changed over the past 15 years from a US-supported, ASEAN-led
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
President William Lai’s (賴清德) first Double Ten National Day address had two strategic goals. For domestic affairs, the speech aimed to foster consensus on national identity, strengthen the country and unite the Taiwanese against a Chinese invasion. In terms of cross-strait relations, the speech aimed to mitigate tensions in the Taiwan Strait and promote the coexistence and prosperity of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in China and the Republic of China (ROC). Lai is taking a different stance from previous Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administrations on domestic political issues. During his speech, he said: “The PRC could not be the
RSS