Connect
To Top

The Queen – Britain’s most powerful weapon

The United Kingdom now finds itself in a period of great uncertainty. After the vote for Brexit, the change in government and Donald Trump’s victory in the United States presidential election, nobody quite knows where the ancient kingdom is headed. Only one figure has the experience and stature to sell the UK on the world stage.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was there when Britain stood alone against the Nazi war machine and saw the liberation of Europe at the hands of the Russians, Americans, and her own people. She watched as Europe rebuilt after the war and was present as the German state adapted to a new age of democratic power. The Queen also saw the rise and fall of Russian Communism and the creation of NATO.

During The Queen’s reign, regimes have come and gone, but the British Monarchy has remained virtually unchanged from its position at the start of the 20th Century. To the rest of the world, The Queen is a titan of history and a true stateswoman.

As the UK attempts to negotiate with world leaders, The Queen could prove a most valuable asset. President-elect Trump has recently spoken about his deep admiration for Her Majesty, and she is widely respected throughout Europe. Her impressive standing on the world stage could be a major factor in keeping Britain from being an irrelevance in the coming decades.

We should not forget that the UK is just one of The Queen’s realms. As well as the UK, The Queen is head of state of: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu. This gives the UK a whole array of friendly allies as it attempts to develop its trading arrangements and defence plans.

According to The Queen’s biographer Andrew Marr, “She is our slightly mysterious department of friendliness”. Whilst world leaders may disagree politically with the British Prime Minister, The Queen provides an apolitical face to represent the British state. She is a symbol of the UK and its people and transcends political partiality. She is hence a powerful diplomat working for the good of her kingdom.

The UK should not forget this; they are very lucky to have such a person in these difficult times.

 

  • RoyalAustralia

    A good, easy to read article. Straight to the point that reminds us how unique Her Majesty is. Long reign the Commonwealth. Thank you.

  • Mr. Christian

    I am sorry; but the Queen is not a thing as an “asset.” And, she does not “sell Britain.” It is true that she embodies both good and sometimes horrible times for Her and Her Kingdom of which I have some knowledge of what she had to face as an embodiment of living history. At some times of stress, I have found Her poise and calm efforts to be extra strength to face trials of life; but, vastly more important for me, is that we share a common thread of strength by trying our best to be Christians.

  • Thomas

    Yeah, the Russians liberated Europe lol, great story lol.

    • John_Twiss

      Had it not been for Russia and the Eastern front, and the heroic battle of Stalingrad, the war would have lasted a good two years more, so yes, Russia was instrumental in defeating Hitler. That half of Europe then became part of the Russian occupation was due to the agreement made between Roosevelt and Stalin.

      • Thomas

        Yeah, but they didn’t “liberate” anything was my point, the Soviet dictatorship was a worse one than the Nazi one.

        • John_Twiss

          I find it difficult to accept that one was indeed worse than the other. Certainly the Russians slaughtered millions of their own people along with hundreds of thousands of the satellite states, but then, there was little reason for Roosevelt to hand over half of Europe to them… something that Churchill had warned him against only to be ignored both by Roosevelt and later by Truman. My point was that while America certainly contributed a great deal to the war effort, they also condemned others in Eastern Europe to certain death, or imprisonment, or loss of property etc., so there are many people who are of several minds about the USA.

          • Thomas

            Well, by any measurement the Soviet Union was worse than Nazi Germany, if you just measure by how many killed by each regime, Soviet Union was worse, if you measure by poverty of population, Soviet Union was worse (with the exception maybe of Germany bombed to pieces at the end of the war lol). I challenge you to provide any measurement that tells us the Soviet Union was better. And remember that SU had starvation up to it’s dissolution. Also, what could Truman do? Truman was very anti-communist, it’s thanks to Trumans policies the US went strongly into the cold war.

          • John_Twiss

            I cannot know whether you are willfully misunderstanding my comments, or whether you may have a problem with English – my comment was simply that both the NAZI regime and the Soviet Union were murderous, but that the Soviet Union would have had far less to work their evil on had the United States not conspired to reward them by giving them half of Europe. Stop trying to avoid my intention and meaning and understand that the United States at best is a co-conspirator of the Soviet Union by awarding them the territories they did.

          • Thomas

            LOL bs, US and UK had no influence over those territories anymore once the SU had occupied them, unless they wanted to start a war over them ofc. To think that the US allowed the SU to take these territories is just wrong.

More in Blog Posts

Royal Central is the web's most popular source for the latest news and information on the British Royal Family and the Monarchies of Europe.

Subscribe via Email

To receive the latest Royal Central posts straight to your email inbox, enter your email address below and press subscribe.

Join 1,488 other subscribers

Copyright © 2016 Royal Central, all rights reserved.