The New Commonwealth (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
The New Commonwealth
Context: Labour's approach to the Commonwealth, 1947-51
The Labour government under Clement Attlee did not view the independence of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon in 1947-8 as the beginning of wholesale decolonisation. Instead, ministers believed Britain's continued prosperity and great power status depended on maintaining the Empire and Commonwealth. They hoped the Commonwealth could develop into a third force in international affairs, counterbalancing both the United States and the Soviet Union. This ambition would not materialise. Britain soon encountered serious difficulties in managing relationships with both old and new Commonwealth members.
The concept of a "third force" represented Britain's aspiration to create an independent power bloc capable of balancing American and Soviet influence during the early Cold War period. This vision assumed the Commonwealth could function as a unified international actor under British leadership.
The old Dominions
The traditional 'old' Dominions comprised Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. These territories, with predominantly white populations of British descent, had long been regarded as Britain's most dependable allies. They were connected to Britain not merely by shared strategic interests but by cultural and familial ties. However, expectations that these Dominions would form a tightly integrated partnership with Britain around shared foreign and defence policies proved unrealistic. The Dominions pursued their own interests and increasingly asserted separate national identities.
Britain's declining influence in the Pacific
Britain's weakening position became evident with the formation of the ANZUS military pact in 1951. This security treaty between Australia, New Zealand and the United States deliberately excluded Britain. Although Attlee's government claimed the arrangement aligned with the principle of individual Commonwealth members taking responsibility in their particular regions, the ANZUS pact demonstrated that the United States had effectively supplanted Britain's role in Pacific security. This development marked a clear reduction in British influence among even its closest Commonwealth partners.
The ANZUS pact of 1951 represented a watershed moment in British imperial decline. Even the white Dominions with the strongest cultural connections to Britain now looked to the United States rather than Britain for their security guarantees. This exclusion from Pacific defence arrangements signalled that Britain could no longer rely on automatic Dominion support for its strategic interests.
The new Commonwealth
Attlee's government hoped to construct a 'new' Commonwealth, consisting of free and independent nations that would transcend divisions of race, colour and creed. This vision presented the new Commonwealth as an effective instrument of British influence worldwide. However, India, Pakistan and Ceylon—newly independent in 1947-8—did not share the white Dominions' enthusiasm for supporting British great power ambitions or British colonial rule elsewhere. The new Commonwealth therefore functioned far less as a cohesive organisation than the old. It possessed no inherent unity, and its members shared minimal common ground.
The newly independent Asian members of the Commonwealth held fundamentally different perspectives on imperialism compared to the white Dominions. Having themselves recently emerged from colonial rule, they were far less willing to support British colonial policies in other territories or to endorse Britain's claims to great power status.
Problems facing the new Commonwealth
Britain encountered multiple difficulties in developing the new Commonwealth as a viable institution:
Economic limitations
Britain, despite its eagerness to lead the Commonwealth, could not provide sufficient incentives for membership in terms of trade opportunities, investment or defence support. The economic benefits of Commonwealth association remained limited.
The South African problem
Talk of racial partnership as a core Commonwealth principle held little attraction for white South Africans. The Nationalist Party, which assumed power in 1948, implemented apartheid—the systematic segregation and separate development of races. Given South Africa's strategic and economic importance (particularly as a major source of uranium and gold), Attlee's government moderated its criticism of Nationalist policies. Nevertheless, South Africa's racial policies created ongoing tension with the concept of a multiracial Commonwealth.
Apartheid: Segregation and separate development of races
The apartheid system directly contradicted Attlee's vision of a multiracial Commonwealth transcending racial divisions. However, South Africa's economic and strategic value to Britain—especially its uranium and gold reserves—meant the Labour government could not afford to confront South Africa too forcefully. This tension between principle and pragmatism would continue to plague the Commonwealth for decades.
India's republican status
Between 1948 and 1949, the new Commonwealth appeared close to collapse before properly establishing itself. Before 1948, Dominions had been required to recognise the British monarch as their head of state. Britain had made no provisions to accommodate Éire or Burma when they became republics and departed the Commonwealth in 1947-8.
India's determination to become a republic in 1948 presented a more substantial problem. As a potentially vast trading partner and seemingly essential ally in a region where communist influence was spreading rapidly, India mattered far more to British interests than Burma or Éire. After considerable negotiation, a compromise emerged whereby republican India would remain within the Commonwealth by accepting the British monarch as 'Head of the Commonwealth' rather than as head of India itself. This formula allowed republican states to participate in Commonwealth structures whilst maintaining their constitutional independence.
The compromise formula of "Head of the Commonwealth" proved crucial to the institution's survival. This innovation allowed republics to remain Commonwealth members without accepting the British monarch as their head of state. Without this flexible constitutional arrangement, India would have departed the Commonwealth, likely triggering its complete dissolution.
The sterling area
The Second World War substantially weakened Britain as a trading nation. By 1945, Britain no longer possessed abundant capital reserves. Countries within the British imperial system that were free to pursue alternative arrangements might reasonably have looked toward the United States for economic partnership. Paradoxically, Britain's post-war economic vulnerability served to reinforce Commonwealth economic solidarity through the sterling area system.
Operation of the sterling area
Almost all the Dominions and several independent countries (such as Iraq) used the British pound sterling as the foundation of their currency systems, depositing their overseas earnings in London. The threat of sterling collapse in 1947 endangered them all with bankruptcy. Furthermore, Britain remained the primary market for most sterling area members. These countries therefore had limited choice but to align their economic fortunes with Britain's.
Measures agreed in 1947 bound sterling area members far more tightly than pre-1939 arrangements to a common trade policy, requiring them to purchase greater proportions of their imports from Britain. The sterling area thus functioned as a closed economic bloc in a manner unprecedented within the Empire. Encompassing a quarter of the world's population and trade, it exceeded the dollar area in scale. Maintaining this closely integrated trading and currency bloc became a central objective of British policy during this period.
The sterling area represented Britain's most effective mechanism for maintaining Commonwealth cohesion after 1947. While political and strategic unity proved elusive, economic interdependence through shared currency arrangements bound Commonwealth members to Britain by necessity rather than choice. The sterling area's scale—encompassing 25% of global population and trade—demonstrated Britain's continued economic reach despite its weakened post-war position.
Developing the colonies
After 1947, Britain retained direct control over numerous colonial territories, particularly throughout Africa. British leaders expressed optimism regarding the stability of their African possessions. Some officials even speculated that Africa might become a 'new Raj'—an extensive tropical resource providing mineral wealth and military manpower comparable to India's former role. Before 1939, relatively little had been undertaken in most colonies to advance economic or social reform or to promote political independence.
Labour's development policy
Labour politicians had discussed in general terms the concept of 'developing' the colonies, though most lacked clear understanding of what development should entail or how it should proceed. Arthur Creech-Jones, serving as Attlee's colonial secretary, committed himself to advancing colonial economic and social development as the essential precondition for eventual progress toward self-government.
Colonial Development and Welfare Act 1945
This legislation allocated £120 million over ten years to assist the colonies' development programmes.
1948 legislative initiatives
Parliament established the Colonial Development Corporation and the Overseas Food Corporation with the specific purpose of improving living standards in colonial territories.
The second colonial occupation
Throughout much of Africa, Britain embarked on what historians have termed a 'second colonial occupation'. Driven by determination to develop colonial economies as rapidly as possible in order to supply Britain with urgently needed raw materials, colonial governments pursued intensive economic development programmes. This represented a marked shift from the more limited pre-war approach to colonial governance and economic exploitation.
The term "second colonial occupation" refers to the intensification of British colonial administration and economic development efforts in Africa after 1945. Unlike the initial colonial conquest and establishment of control, this "second occupation" involved much more active intervention in colonial economies, driven by Britain's desperate need for raw materials to support post-war reconstruction. This period saw increased investment, more extensive administrative structures, and more ambitious development schemes than had characterised pre-war colonial governance.
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
-
The old Dominions (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa) increasingly asserted separate identities despite cultural ties to Britain; the ANZUS pact of 1951 excluded Britain from Pacific security arrangements.
-
The new Commonwealth, comprising India, Pakistan and Ceylon, functioned less cohesively than the old Dominions; these Asian members did not support British great power pretensions or colonial rule elsewhere.
-
India's determination to become a republic in 1948 threatened Commonwealth collapse; the compromise formula of 'Head of the Commonwealth' allowed republican states to remain members.
-
The sterling area bound Commonwealth members economically to Britain through shared currency and trade arrangements, creating a closed economic bloc larger than the dollar area.
-
Labour's colonial development policy, including the 1945 Colonial Development and Welfare Act and 1948 initiatives, aimed to prepare colonies for eventual self-government whilst providing Britain with essential raw materials.