Archbishop’s Views on American ‘Imperialism’ & Old British Imperialism

November 25th, 2007
By SWARAAJ CHAUHAN, International Columnist

Print Print

archbishop of canterbury

When the Archbishop of Canterbury says that “the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday”, let us pause and see who is this man and why is he saying that. There is no point in getting into a hysterical “for” or “against” mode about what Dr Rowan Williams stated in a magazine interview recently.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the senior bishop and principal leader of the Church of England, as well as the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion. Williams is the 104th in the list of Archbishops of Canterbury, in a line that goes back more than 1400 years to the first, Saint Augustine of Canterbury, who founded the see, the oldest in England, in the year 597.

“As Primate of All England, he is the chief religious figure in the Church of England (the British sovereign is the “Supreme governor” of the church) and its primary leader. The Archbishop of Canterbury plays a central part in (the British) national ceremonies such as coronations; thanks to his high public profile, his opinions are often in demand by the news media.

The Archbishop has an important ecumenical and interfaith role, speaking on behalf of Anglicans in England and worldwide. In addition to his office, the Archbishop also holds a number of other positions; for example, he is Joint President of the Council of Christians and Jews in the UK. Some positions he formally holds ex officio and others virtually so (the incumbent of the day, although appointed personally, is appointed because of his office).

Now let’s come to what Dr Williams said…and said it very emphatically. The Times reports: “Rowan Williams claimed that America’s attempt to intervene overseas by ‘clearing the decks’ with a ‘quick burst of violent action’ had led to ‘the worst of all worlds’.

“Williams went beyond his previous critique of the conduct of the war on terror, saying the United States had lost the moral high ground since September 11. He urged it to launch a ‘generous and intelligent programme of aid directed to the societies that have been ravaged; a check on the economic exploitation of defeated territories; a demilitarisation of their presence’.

“Williams suggested American leadership had broken down: ‘We have only one global hegemonic power. It is not accumulating territory: it is trying to accumulate influence and control. That’s not working’.

“He contrasted it unfavourably with how the British Empire governed India. ‘It is one thing to take over a territory and then pour energy and resources into administering it and normalising it. Rightly or wrongly, that’s what the British Empire did — in India, for example.

” ‘It is another thing to go in on the assumption that a quick burst of violent action will somehow clear the decks and that you can move on and other people will put it back together — Iraq, for example’.

“In the interview in Emel, a Muslim lifestyle magazine, Williams makes only mild criticisms of the Islamic world. He said the Muslim world must acknowledge that its ‘political solutions were not the most impressive’.”

This interview may kick up a controversy, especially because a growing number of people see the world only through the prism of their religions and culture. The Archbishop of Canterbury has expressed a point of view that needs to be first understood with a cool state of mind. And only then we need to react if we wish to have a sensible and purposeful debate.

I have wonderful memories of my visit in 1975 to Canterbury city and the church, located in eastern Kent in the South East region of England. Much of the city walls and one of the city gates remain. “The city is the seat of the Archbishop of Canterbury… Thomas Becket was murdered in Canterbury Cathedral; King Henry IV was buried along with the Edward the Black Prince. Geoffery Chaucer wrote the Canterbury Tales about a group of people travelling from London to Canterbury. This literary heritage was continued with Christopher Marlowe who was born here.”




This entry was posted on Sunday, November 25th, 2007 at 3:24 am and is filed under Britain, Christians, Bush Administration, Foreign Policy, Muslims, Foreign Politics, George W. Bush, Islam, United Kingdom, Foreign Affairs. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

 
close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus



By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.