What do Syria and the British Monarchy have in Common? Legitimacy Crises!

The coincidence of the Syrian crisis with the Jubilee Celebrations in the UK for the 50th anniversary of their Queen’s accession to the throne may appear at first instance to be entirely separate news items in a pretty busy news schedule.  But underneath each story is a crisis of legitimacy, and attempts by key protagonists – Bashir Al-Assad in the first instance, and Queen Elizabeth in the second – to maintain their weakining legitimacy.  Henry Kissinger waded into the Syria crisis with a strongly worded criticism of US policy in the crisis. With an argument rooted all the way back in The Treaty of Westphalia, Kissinger railed against the default interventionism that has characterised the Arab Spring as breaking with centuries of – essentially – respect for national sovereignty.  Of course one could argue that the proxy wars of the Cold War and more recent interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan – and even in Yemen, Somalia, and Kosovo – pre-dated the Arab Spring and clearly established an option of pragmatic interventionism, moral hazard be damned.

The integrity of the state, the sanctity of its sovereignty, and quite literally the neck of Syria’s leader, are all on the line.  A question arises about where the state itself gets its legitimacy.  While Assad held recent elections, it appears pretty clear that those elections did little to legitimise his position.  The opposition and self-proclaimed oppressed people within Syria are looking to the International Community to intervene and protect their human rights.  Now, when we legitimise a political institution, we offer up our freedom to that institution so that it will secure our individual rights and freedoms.  If the oppressed peoples of Syria are looking to the international community to secure their rights, and if interventionalism (humanitarian or otherwise) has become a default position, are we witnessing a transition of sovereignty and / or legitimacy to “The International Community”?

Meanwhile, closer to home, the sun is stubbornly refusing to make an appearance in London for the pomp of the Jubilee.  Quite literally, it is raining on their parade.  As if the British weather wasn’t enough, Poly Toynbee decided to have a pop at the Royal Family, as she is wont to do.  Her assault is more wide ranging than that – she attacks that fading vision of Britishness, a decrepit and anachronistic national identity that bears no resemblance to who the British actually are.  Perhaps the legitimacy of the State is not undermined by the extraordinary edifice that is the Monarchy; it is more tourist attraction / museum piece than something that geniunely represents Britain.  But its position is increasingly detached from the State, and one suspects that the next accession could well be strained.

 

Advertisements

One thought on “What do Syria and the British Monarchy have in Common? Legitimacy Crises!

  1. […] is changing.  Kissinger’s recent article on Syria, which I blogged about here, criticised the US government and the International Community for its preference these days for […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: