Commune Consensu: A Soft Power Comparison of the Commonwealth and the European Union

Abstract

The post-war heritage, institutional similarities, and policy motivations shared between commonwealth entities and contemporary international organisations, and their subsequent impact on soft power represents a wealth of unexplored potential. As will be explored in this article, both the Commonwealth of Nations and the European Union represent different facets of contemporary multilateralism, have a markedly different impact on their respective members, and yet are both formidable ‘hybrid’ actors that can contribute to, and even constitute, global governance, while simultaneously defying easy description. Examining the concept of ‘soft power’, the structural and normative challenges facing both entities, the manner by which ‘house values’ are used to define the home institution, and the specific role of development policy, this article offers a series of pragmatic policy reforms that both organisations must perforce undertake if each is to tackle successfully the 21st century challenge of maintaining both structural and substantive integrity.

Key words:

• European Union
• Commonwealth
• aid
• development
• governance
• norms
• soft power
• European Development Fund
• Commonwealth Charter

Acknowledgement

Commune Consensu, ‘By common consent’. With many thanks to Michel Gloznek, MPhil, St Antony’s College, Oxford, former Canterbury Christ Church Politics/IR student, and a recent convert to all things Commonwealth.

Notes

1. Shaw identifies four commonwealth entities: Anglophone, Francophone, Lusophone and Iberoamerican states.

2. Nye (2004, 2011), Melissen (2005), Leonard (2005), and many others.

3. Nye argues that soft power ‘rests primarily on three resources’: culture, political values and foreign policies (Nye, 2004, p. 11). In addition, entities like the EU, which represent an economic and monetary union equivalent to its political pulling power, are further characterised by ‘sticky power’, which denotes the specific influence of economy in terms of trade, currency and investment (Melissen, 2005, p. 33).

4. Normative power has produced equal amount of scholarship as has soft power. However, where soft power remains a generic concept applicable to a range of international actors, the derivation and application of normative power is almost exclusively European in genealogy, with Carr, Duchêne, Galtung, Manners and Whitman–and many more–contributing to this debate.

5. Macrocosms of this same generic–genetic problem are found in the multilateral versus bilateral approach to foreign policies, while microcosm examples are represented in the regional versus state-specific approach attempted in key policies such as trade, security and even diplomacy by various international organisations.

6. European Union development policy is a complex, fast-moving and intricate area of scholarship. Key readings in this field include, for example, Carbone (2009), Gerrit and Orbie (2009), Flint (2008), Holden (2009) and Mold (2007).

7. At various stages of negotiation and completion, the five African EPAs comprise West Africa, Central Africa, Eastern and Southern Africa, the Eastern African Community and the South African Development Community; with one Caribbean and one Pacific EPA grouping (European Union, 2015).

8. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office pays the UK’s share of the Secretariat’s regular budget, while DFID funds the two main development programmes: the CFTC and the Commonwealth Youth Programme.

9. Encompassing seven sub-criteria of criticality to international objectives, criticality to UK aid objectives, focus on poor countries, fragile contexts, gender equality, climate change/environment, and contribution to net results.

10. Encompassing five sub-criteria of cost and value consciousness, partnership behaviour, strategic performance, financial resources management, and transparency and accountability.

11. As suggested in the 2013 Government Response to the House of Commons (p. 11), ‘co-location of Embassies, where it is of mutual benefit, supports closer cooperation, as well as leading to efficiency savings’.