END OF AN ERA

No matter our views on the British monarchy, as an institution or personally towards the late Queen Elizabeth II, her passing has caused widespread resonance around the world. Perhaps because she was arguably the most significant historical figure of recent decades. That is why her death has, without exaggeration, become a global event.

In this day and age, when everything happens at breakneck speed and sometimes on totally unexpected premises, the British queen has been the truest symbol of constancy. She has indeed always remained a queen with great dignity, an example to the citizens of her own country and beyond. As British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said, from childhood Elizabeth "radiated a dignity and authority remarkable for a child". She retained these qualities up until her death. And now we are talking about the end of the New Elizabethan era...

Incomparable monarch

Elizabeth II , who ascended the throne way back in 1952, was the first British monarch in history to rule for so long. To understand the significance of these figures, it is suffice to mention that the majority of people living in Britain and the Commonwealth today were born and lived all their lives during her reign.

Elizabeth II was the last head of state to survive the Second World War. Then the future queen spent five months in the British Army Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she trained as a driver mechanic. And on May 8, 1945, when Europe was celebrating victory over Nazi Germany, she walked out of the Buckingham Palace in her military uniform to celebrate the event with everyone else, unrecognised, as an ordinary citizen of the country.

During Elizabeth II's reign, the country ceased to be an empire "over which the sun never set", but became a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, joined the EEC and left the European Union. Elizabeth survived the Suez, Caribbean and Falklands crises, the Korean War, the conflict in Northern Ireland, the 1980s miners' strike, the Scottish independence referendum, the fire at the Windsor Castle, the death of Princess Diana, the Duke of York and Prince Harry scandals and many other national and world events.

She outlived 15 successive prime ministers, including prominent figures such as Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher and 13 American presidents. The queen met with virtually all the world's political and religious leaders, many public figures and celebrities in various fields of the arts.

Long live the king!

The new British king is Elizabeth's eldest son, 73-year-old Prince Charles, who will now be called Charles III. Charles, like his mother, is the head of the Commonwealth of Nations, an association of 56 independent countries with 2.4 billion people.

In addition to Britain, he will be the head of 14 nations, including Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea and others. In these countries, the influence of British culture and British capital still plays a key role.

Not surprisingly, almost all media outlets these days wonder what awaits the new British monarch and the country under his rein. And many—some regretfully, some gloatingly—pointed out that the queen had left Britain at a very difficult time. Indeed, Charles III will have to cope with a growing economic crisis, and serious internal political tensions related to the recent change of prime minister in the wake of the Boris Johnson scandal. Another important challenge is the impact of global climate change, which seriously affected the UK this summer.

In addition, observers note that issues of growing separatist sentiment in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and the Commonwealth also cause problems to the British crown. For example, Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Gaston Browne, said that the country could hold a referendum within three years on whether to retain the British monarch as head of state or move completely to a republican form of government. Surprisingly, similar statements are occasionally voiced even in Canada and Australia.

Much will now depend on how the new Prime Minister, Liz Truss, performs in this situation. Incidentally, it is rumoured that the late queen did not treat her well. Perhaps because in her younger years Truss publicly advocated the abolition of the monarchy. "We don't think any man should become king by birth," the current head of the British government said at that time. Now Charles III will have to rule the country together with the Truss government.  By the way, he has never been particularly popular with the people.

Future talks

British attitudes towards Charles have been mainly influenced by his scandalous divorce from Princess Diana, who is still loved and remembered in Britain. Charles's current wife Camilla, now Queen Consort, has long been the target of criticism from many Britons, who blame her for the death of Princess Diana. Now it is apparently the turn of Charles’s youngest son Prince Harry’s wife to be a ‘black sheep’, who gave a series of scandalous interviews about the royal family and accused its members of racism even during the queen’s lifetime.

It is clear that, due to his age, Charles III will not spend as many years on the throne as his mother did. Many are wondering what kind of monarch Charles' eldest son, Prince William, could be? Popular sympathy is certainly on his side, but a number of political analysts emphasise that the prince lacks the necessary political experience and the necessary authority among elites and even within the British society.

One might wonder the difference, since Britain is a constitutional monarchy where the monarch essentially performs only ceremonial functions. However, anyone who is interested not only in the facade of the British monarchy, including the guardsmen in furry hats, the five o'clock tea parties, Christmas pudding and Downtown Abbey, knows that the British monarch still holds a lot of power, to say the least. For example, he decides whether to declare war or make peace, can dissolve a government or call a re-election of parliament, enact laws, and as the head of the Anglican church, have full control over the judicial system.

It is all about the extent to which he, or she for that matter, chooses to exercise these rights. Elizabeth II knew how to exercise her rights in a very diligent way. But we yet to see the performances of Charles and William on the throne. Elizabeth II was a true symbol of conservative values and standards and, given the scale of her personality, no one dared openly challenge this. But the new British monarchs will have to reign in a world that is swiftly and subtly dismantling all past authorities. It is unlikely that the current generation raised on TikTok will wait and wince over the images of the royal family enjoying the walk on the royal lawn published by the evening tabloids. Many commentators point out that the main thing is that the well-known Operation London Bridge does not become prophetic.

But certainly, whoever ends up on the British throne in the future seems never again to be as significant, symbolic, revered a figure as Elizabeth II was. It is also true that, with the queen gone, the twentieth century said its final goodbye to all of us. Whether the present world leaders wish to preserve the values that the British queen had always cherished in the twenty-first century is a big question...