On a more serious note, what is the economic or political benefit to India of being in the commonwealth? Is the Commonwealth an outdated institution whose only reason for existence is to remind the British monarchy of their once vast empire? Is there any evidence of easier trade practices, people movement, commonality of understanding in any other international forum for the commonwealth members? If none of this is really true, or substantial, why is the Indian prime minister spending time attending the CHOGM? I would like serious rather than flippant, or abusive responses to my doubts please. Many thanks.
RE:Commonwealth
by Suganth M on Nov 24, 2007 05:55 PM Permalink
The commonwealth comprises of more than 53 nations which were former british colonies except Mozambique which was a french colony.The Commonwealth was established due to a common culture prevailing in these nations.The English Language, Democracy and similarities in the constitution. The objective of the commonwealth was to gain member support in ensuring these fledgling democracies support each other in democracy being maintained and increase trade. However, the commonwealth has now been reduced to a club of former british colonies that constantly remind the British that we were once slaves to them.No surprise that its is still headed by the Queen. The last time I read about the commonwealth was that neither country gained economic benefits as all of them still fare poorly in the World stage.But the league is still being continued with a notion that it might gain the same amount of clout that the European Union or the G8 has. Personally, I beleive it does nothing but constantly reminds us of our colonial past. India should be wiser and exit gracefully from a league that benefits no one.
RE:Commonwealth
by Aramac Memon on Nov 25, 2007 08:43 AM Permalink
SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT??? EXIT OUT OF COMMONWEALTH AND GO CREATE A NEW COMMON WEALTH? YOU CAN EXIT OUT OF EVERYTHING. I CAN CLAIM THAT REDIFF IS A MALLU WEB SITE SUPPORTING COMMUNIST IDEALS AND ASK EVERYONE TO EXIT THE BOARD.. BUT WHAT IS POINT?? IF YOU ARE EXITING IT WILL NOT MAKE AN IMPACT...
LIVE AND LET LIVE... THERE ARE COUNTRIES IN THE COMMON WEALTH WHICH REQUIRES AID AND RECOGNITION (AFRICAN COUNTRIES WHO NEED HELP). SHOW SOME LEADERSHIP... COMMONWEALTH IS NOT FOR BRITAIN.. INDIA IS THE LARGEST ECONOMY WITHIN COMMONWEALTH NOW. SHOW LEADERSHIP...
RE:Commonwealth
by Vikram on Nov 25, 2007 10:28 AM Permalink
So UN is another organization doing the same things i suppose and then there is NAM and then there is ASEAN and then there is the African Union and then there is the islamic org UIC and so on and so on.Is there an end to these "organisations"? Leadership?Africa is full of resources,if the "Leadership" in africa is corrupt what does India have to do with that?Lesser number of these organizations and "collective Leadership" wouldnt that be better?Why should be be part of an organisation of which doe not have a democratic Leader but the Queen as the Head(I havent checked to see whether this is a fact or not) symbolic or otherwise why have her head it? I have an answer to why she should head it,each and every member country is independent,Whe arent the heads of member states the heads of commonwealth? Call it Nationalism or call it some other thing.We do not have any need to bow to this queen.Bow to your Mother land not to the queen of UK.
RE:Commonwealth
by Pradip Parekh on Nov 25, 2007 01:51 AM Permalink
good post. china does far better in african commonwealth countries than india does despite commonwealth. no idi amin ever kicke out the chinese. commonwealth could offer no help against idi amin. it took a lot persuading of britain for it to eventually accept the hindu refugees from uganda into britain after considerable opposition from within britain. there is only one way to gain economic benefit (and self respect): by being competetive. i hope this man kamlesh sharma resigns after realizing the utter uselessness and utter boredom of his job duties if not due to self respect.
