Academic literature on the topic 'Great Britain. Commonwealth Office'

Great Britain implemented a model of transfer of power in India by granting independence to the country while preserving its place in the Commonwealth of Nations. The key element was handing over governance by Imperial authorities to local forces by legal means. The transfer of power led to the building of nation-states in former British India. The completion of the process marked a new stage for contemporary India and enabled Indian political institutions to operate on the basis of the British Empire’s legacy since that time. Therefore, the legacy’s values were important features of the power transfer. However, the Imperial legacy had material representation in numerous official documents kept in colonial offices. Some documents being witnesses of the British governance were eliminated by Britain’s ‘Operation Legacy.’ During the Operation, some of the official papers were incinerated, while others retained under the title of ‘legacy papers’. A connection between the transfer of power and Operation Legacy has not been explored to date, but one may exist. Some questions are: could the two processes, one of which had finished in 1947 and the other had commenced, supposedly, in 1947, be interconnected? Could the transfer of power have influenced Operation Legacy, and could Operation Legacy, in turn, have become a part of other colonial power transfers by Britain after Indian independence? The article aims to investigate how Britain’s experience in India influenced its developing Operation Legacy in other colonies and whether it later changed the practices of transfer of power. The author discusses why the first indications of a well-organized Operation Legacy emerged in Ceylon in late 1947, when Ceylon sought independence. This became known as the result of the internal inquiry by the Foreign Office, also known as the Cary Report.

‘It turned out to be a war unlike all others in that the respective Commanders communicated daily by telephones between Rawalpindi and New Delhi’. Thus it was that Henry Devereux – a British officer with the Pakistan Artillery – remembered the India-Pakistan conflict on Kashmir, 1947–49. It was a unique conflict with British generals commanding armies, on both sides, engaged in open warfare with each other and British diplomats taking up cudgels on behalf of the hostile governments they were accredited to. Therefore, whether to issue an order of “stand down” to the British military personnel involved in Kashmir emerged as an important question which the Clement Attlee Government (1945–51) faced as it struggled to formulate its response to the conflict. The article focuses on this question of the involvement of British officers in the armies of two warring dominions of the British Commonwealth and analyses the response of Great Britain, which sought to resolve the dilemma by keeping in mind the wider, international ramifications of its response – a fascinating though neglected aspect of the immediate aftermath of British decolonization in South Asia.

Project by authorship and idealization of the paraense doctor Wirley Otávio Oliveira de Barros, which involves art, science, history and political reflection, developed in the city of Belém, capital of the State of Pará, in the middle of the Amazon region, registered in a notary through a Notarial Act. This grandiose work was developed with scientific support Museum of Geosciences of the Amazon (MUGEO) of the Institute of Geosciences (IG) of the Federal University of Pará (UFPA) through Prof. Dr. Marcondes Lima da Costa, with a PhD in Mineralogy and Geochemistry from Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (Friedrich-Alexander), in Germany (1982) and with a post-doctorate in mineralogy-geochemistry from IG-USP (2001); chemist Dr. Suyanne Flávia Rodrigues, with a doctorate in Mineralogy and Geochemistry from the Graduate Program in Geology and Geochemistry (PPGG) at IG / UFPA and MsC. geologist Gisele Tavares Marques, also from PPGG. This project, which will soon be presented to the public, was duly informed to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor (Elizabeth II), of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in addition to Head of Commonwealth Realms and Defender of Faith, as it presents as a prominent item the replica work of “Saint Edward's Crown” or “St. Stephen’s Crown ”, as mentioned in the Royal letter received on February 3, 2016, signed by Miss Jennie Vine (Deputy to the Senior Correspondence Officer for Buckingham Palace), who on this occasion conveys the monarch's personal message. This is the official coronation crown of British monarchs, consisting of 444 stones of distinct mineral gems, which inspired the title attributed to the project. Therefore, it is a replica of a symbol of POWER, whose heraldic meaning of CRUZ DE MALTA and FLOR-DE-LIS guide the conduct and political profile of the ruler. In this regard, the author also addresses a message to the "men of power", made through a personal text of his own.

The article is devoted to an analysis of the role of the Commonwealth of Nations in British history and politics. Having emerged at the end of the XIX c. as an informal association of Britain and dominions within the British Empire it has developed into an independent institute that includes almost all former British territories. Even though nowadays the Commonwealth is a free association of countries and manifests democratic values, this distinctive representation of imperialists stood at its origins, and at times the term itself signified the empire, though in a more progressive, democratic and human form. The author argues that for many decades the main reason for this evolution was British politicians'desire to deter regions from breaking away from within the British sphere of influence. Indeed, the Commonwealth countries belonged to one of the three most important and traditional circles of British political and economic interests, as formulated by W. Churchill, while its importance has been constantly emphasized in numerous election manifestos and government statements. However, with the weakening of Britain and growing independence within the organization, as well as because of contradictions between British national interests and the Commonwealth's founding ideals and principles, Britain has become less and less capable of impacting the organization, and its significance has declined, while some British leaders have even openly sabotaged it. Nevertheless, voices that appeal to reanimate the institution, as well as Britain's role in it, are still heard in the British political arena.

ABSTRACTBased on the recently released documents in the Public Record Office, London, this article is concerned with examining the reasons behind the shift in the British approach towards decolonization in Africa signalled by Macmillan's ‘wind of change’ speech to the South African parliament on 3 February 1960. The documents suggest that the British decision to abdicate in Africa was partly due to international considerations, and to Cold War politics and the need to prevent Soviet penetration in Africa. The change from ‘multi-racialism’ to ‘non-racialism’ can be attributed to the influence of the commonwealth relations office under Lord Home, and an initiative from the leader of the Africa Capricorn society, David Stirling. The emphasis on the need for Britain to pursue the same policy in all of Africa can also be traced to the commonwealth relations office. Macmillan, himself was influenced by the ‘moral’ aspect, by the policies pursued by the Belgians in the Congo, but above all by the failure of French policy in Algeria.

This article examines the discussions and decisions which occurred within the British government concerning Britain's military involvement in the Korean peninsula at a time when Britain was pulling out of its military obligations in Asia – colloquially known as the ‘retreat East of Suez’ – in the late 1960s and the early 1970s. After the end of the Korean War, Britain created the Commonwealth Liaison Mission in Seoul and provided a frigate for use in Korean waters by the American-led United Nations Command and British soldiers for the United Nations Honour Guard. When relations between North and South Korea reached crisis point at the end of the 1960s, London was concerned that Britain could be entangled in an unaffordable military conflict in the Korean peninsula. The Ministry of Defence therefore argued for the abolition of the commitment of the British frigate, but the Foreign Office opposed this initiative so as to mitigate the blow to Anglo-American relations caused by Britain's refusal to commit troops to Vietnam. When Edward Heath's government negotiated a Five Power Defence Agreement with Singapore, Malaysia, Australia and New Zealand in April 1971, the Ministry of Defence was, despite the objections of the Foreign Office, finally successful in repealing the frigate commitment for reasons of overstretching military resources. Furthermore, the Ministry of Defence then called for the abolition of the Commonwealth Liaison Mission altogether when it was then discovered that the British contingent of the United Nations Honour Guard would have to fight under the command of the United Nations Commander in case of a military conflict in the Korean peninsula. But this proposal too was rebuffed by the Foreign Office, concerned that such a move would greatly damage Anglo-Korean relations at a time when Britain was considering establishing diplomatic relations with North Korea.

In the article, it is stated that Great Britain had been the biggest empire in the world in the course of many centuries. Due to synchronic and diachronic approaches it was detected time simultaneousness of the British Empire’s development in the different parts of the world. Different forms of its ruling (colonies, dominions, other territories under her auspice) manifested this phenomenon.The British Empire went through evolution from the First British Empire which was developed on the count mostly of the trade of slaves and slavery as a whole to the Second British Empire when itcolonized one of the biggest states of the world India and some other countries of the East; to the Third British Empire where it colonized countries practically on all the continents of the world. TheForth British Empire signifies the stage of its decomposition and almost total down fall in the second half of the 20th century. It is shown how the national liberation moments starting in India and endingin Africa undermined the British Empire’s power, which couldn’t control the territories, no more. The foundation of the independent nation state of Great Britain free of colonies did not lead to lossof the imperial spirit of its establishment, which is manifested in its practical deeds – Organization of the British Commonwealth of Nations, which later on was called the Commonwealth, Brexit and so on.The conclusions are drawn that Great Britain makes certain efforts to become a global state again.

The Decennial Supplement on Occupational Mortality published in 1978 commented on mortality differences between the social classes (Chapter 8) using data from the 1971 Census and the deaths in the period 1970–72. The analysis was based on life tables prepared for the individual social classes from which derived indices, for example expectations of life, were calculated. It is proposed here to repeat this exercise using the data for males recently published in microfiche form by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys—OPCS. This time, the Decennial Supplement has omitted to provide an analysis and commentary and we propose to make some attempt to remedy this deficiency. In our analysis, the Decennial Supplement data have been supplemented by data from the OPCS Longitudinal Study.

On the eve of the 1914-18 war, Great Powers had competed for influence in the Balkans. While preparing for the war with the Ottoman Empire the Balkan states were ready to take huge war credits and to place big orders for weapons and military equipment. Foreign Office did not show any interest in involving British capital and industry in this competition. British diplomacy even discouraged investments in Serbian military programme before 1914.