Features of development of the British monarchy in the era of Queen Elizabeth II

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

West Ukrainian National University

Features of development of the British monarchy in the era of Queen Elizabeth II

Abstract

Keywords: Great Britain, Queen, British monarchy, Elizabeth II, Charles III, Ukraine.

Анотація

Особливості розвитку Британської монархії в епоху королеви Елізабет ІІ

У статті представлено результати дослідження ролі королеви Елізабет ІІ в історії державно-правового розвитку Великої Британії у період її правління з 1953 по 2022 роки. Проаналізовано її державотворчі здобутки, особливості стилю монаршого правління, взаємини з суспільством та результати міжнародної діяльності. Окреслено перспективи правління її наступника короля Чарльза ІІІ. У висновку узагальнено позицію королеви Елізабет ІІ щодо російської агресії Україні.

У підсумку зазначено, що період правління Чарльза ІІІ стане перехідним етапом в історії британської монархії від унікального та неповторного періоду Елізабет ІІ, яка започаткувала процес її оновлення, до правління її внука Вільяма, сьогодні принца Уельського. Ітиметься не лише про персону монарха, а про якісні зміни в модернізації інституту Корони, які диктує час. Головний принцип трансформацій Чарльз ІІІ уже окреслив - відданість ключовим принципам монаршого правління, серед яких безумовно залишиться близькість до народу, все більша відкритість і соціальна відповідальність, поборником якої десятиліттями є сам король як відомий благодійник і меценат. Нові можливості для монархії може надати еволюція політичної системи Великої Британії. Зважаючи на модернізацію виборчого права країни, яке прямує до заміни традиційної, але застарілої мажоритарної системи на пропорційну та урізноманітнення партійно-політичного спектра, монарх цілком може відігравати роль незалежного посередника у міжпартійних переговорах щодо формування наступної парламентської більшості.

Для України в сучасних умовах протистояння російській імперській агресії надзвичайно важливо те, що для Чарльза характерна чітка та активна громадянська і політична позиція. Чарльз як високоосвічена людина, дипломований мистецтвознавець та історик давно обізнаний з основами української культури і державотворчої традиції. З початком російської агресії 2014 року Чарльз, на відміну від королеви Елізабет, недвозначно критично висловлювався щодо дій Москви, а одного разу в приватній розмові навіть порівняв політику Путіна з політикою Гітлера. У березні 2022 року Чарльз відверто засудив вторгнення Росії в Україну й сказав, що це війна проти демократії і свободи, чого так і не дозволила собі з принципових мотивів його покійна мати. Після сходження на трон очікуємо від короля Чарльза ІІІ більшої публічної стриманості щодо ситуації в Україні. Однак його особисті людські та політичні позиції безмовно залишаться незмінними, як і активна підтримка України народом Великої Британії, розвиток міждержавних союзницьких відносин, тон якій задала Елізабет ІІ.

Ключові слова: Велика Британія, королева, британська монархія, Елізабет ІІ, Чарльз ІІІ, Україна.

Introduction

Statement of the problem. With the passing of a man, the years of life pass, with the passing of a monarch, an era passes. This is indeed true in the case of the Queen of Great Britain Elizabeth II (Slavic version of the name - Elizaveta), who passed away on September 8, 2022 in the royal Balmoral Castle in Scotland. A dignified rule was crowned with a dignified departure. Two days before her death, the queen, exhausted by illness and old age, no longer able to come to London, where she usually received prime ministers in Westminster, found the strength with a smile on her face to perform her historically final act of statesmanship - to witness the transfer of the post of head of government from Boris Johnson to Liz Truss. At the end of the funeral and commemoration days, which enveloped the United Kingdom for three weeks and received a wide echo throughout the world, we will try to highlight the significant political and legal processes of the era of this monarch from the projection of historical transformations of the depth of the past seven decades of her reign, to assess the role of Her Majesty's person in the modern history of Great Britain, Europe and the world, Ukrainian-British relations, which is the purpose of this study.

The state of research of the problem. Ukrainian British Studies is becoming more and more developed. At the same time, historical biography and analysis of the contribution of individual figures in the history of Great Britain to its state and legal development still remain insufficient. The figure of Queen Elizabeth II has practically not found coverage as a separate subject of research among the group of Ukrainian researchers. Therefore, it is necessary to highlight first of all the publications of leading domestic British scholars N. Yakovenko [1], E. Brailian [2], V. Kruszynski [3], A. Hrubinko [4], O. Pavliuk [5]. Among foreign publications we should mention the works of Sally Bedell Smith [6], J. Black [7], J. Bond [8], S. Bradford [9], A. May [10], A. Gromyko [11].

Presentation of the main research material

The reign of Queen Elizabeth II (full name at birth - Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor) formally began back in 1953, when she was 27 years old. At birth, it would seem that the princess had no chance to occupy the highest position in the country and the most powerful world empire at that time, because she was fifth in the line of succession. The early start of the reign of the young princess was the result of the untimely death from lung cancer of her father King George VI, who in turn became the monarch thanks to the abdication of the eldest brother King Edward VIII (who had been king for 11 months), the death of the second brother and the rejection of claims to the throne of the third . Such a favor of fate to Elizabeth, who at that time had already managed to create a family with a representative of the royal houses of Europe, Prince of Greece and Denmark Philip Mountbatten, for the British society meant an additional impetus for the post-war recovery, while throwing the young ruler into the maelstrom of complex processes of transformation of the British monarchy and the remnants of the world empire in the new international conditions [5].

The growth of the Cold War-era bloc confrontation and the subsequent steady process of the disintegration of the British Empire became key challenges to the functioning of the British monarchy for several decades. The main internal factor of the existence of the monarchy was the necessity of its timely and adequate response to the dynamic processes of socio-cultural changes of the post-war society, which required a new quality of communication with the subjects. The largest, richest and most powerful monarchy in the world needed institutional and functional modernization, primarily in the direction of humanization and socialization (approaching the interests and urgent problems of the common people), finding a balance between loyalty to traditions and the perception of new realities, primarily in ethnic, gender and religious dimensions, the conformity of the formation open information society, which developed rapidly. The queen was persistently and effectively looking for ways to carry out such modernization. Elizabeth II, by personal example, showed the possibilities of combining royal traditions and innovative forms of activity of Her Majesty's court and the royal family, and so that the British and the whole world still, even after the death of the beloved queen, are enthusiastically watching the «multi-episode series» about the life and passions of the British royal court.

Britain in the 40s and 50s of the 20th century experienced very difficult pages in its history. The heroic struggle of British troops on various fronts, active participation in the anti-Hitler coalition, influence on the international arena provided the country with leading positions in the cohort of victorious states. However, the victory came at a heavy price - the inevitable post-war economic decline and, most importantly, the loss of the empire, which was the result of the objective processes of the strengthening of the international anti-colonial movement and the formation of a system of bipolar confrontation, painfully hit the pride of the British. In these conditions, the stoicism of the royal family, which refused to leave its native country under the threat of its occupation and under the conditions of bombing by the Nazi Luftwaffe, the replacement of the monarch by the young and vibrant Elizabeth as a symbol of renewal and hope played a significant role in preserving the internal socio-political consensus and Britain's high place in world politics.

The withdrawal of its “pearl” India from the British Empire in 1947 led to a reformatting of relations with the still dependent or semi-dependent territories in the form of the Commonwealth of Nations.

The withdrawal of its “pearl” India from the British Empire in 1947 led to a reformatting of relations with the still dependent or semi-dependent territories in the form of the Commonwealth of Nations. Already during the reign of Elizabeth II in the 1960s and 1970s, decolonization accelerated Africa and the Caribbean. More than two dozen countries became independent states from Great Britain, and what is fundamentally important for evaluating the policy of the British Monarchy - almost all of them peacefully. In the end, the last great British colony of Hong Kong was handed over to China in 1997 based on the agreements reached. At the same time, the format of the Commonwealth of Nations, which includes an essentially loose coalition of more than 50 partner countries friendly to Great Britain, united primarily by trade and economic interests and formal recognition of the political leadership of the British monarch, has become a generally successful formula for maintaining British influence in various parts of the world. At the same time, maintaining various levels of ties, including formal recognition of the jurisdiction of the British Crown on its territory, which is still practiced by several countries of the world (primarily Australia, Canada, New Zealand), happened not least thanks to the efforts andauthority of Queen Elizabeth II personally. Thanks to an extremely high intelligence and a broad outlook, hard work and perseverance, which became the key to unparalleled activity on the international arena, the queen made a significant contribution to maintaining the influence of Great Britain on world political processes, despite the seemingly inevitable decline of the country's authority as a post-empire, which was declining to the level of a state middle level

Already the unprecedentedly innovative nature of Elizabeth Il's policy in this area can be considered quite sufficient to define the period of her reign as historical for Britain. took place not least thanks to the efforts and authority of Queen Elizabeth II personally. Thanks to an extremely high intelligence and a broad outlook, hard work and perseverance, which became the key to unparalleled activity on the international arena, the queen made a significant contribution to maintaining the influence of Great Britain on world political processes, despite the seemingly inevitable decline of the country's authority as a post-empire, which was declining to the level of a state middle level Already the unprecedentedly innovative nature of Elizabeth II's policy in this area can be considered quite sufficient to define the period of her reign as historical for Britain. took place not least thanks to the efforts and authority of Queen Elizabeth II personally. Thanks to an extremely high intelligence and a broad outlook, hard work and perseverance, which became the key to unparalleled activity on the international arena, the queen made a significant contribution to maintaining the influence of Great Britain on world political processes, despite the seemingly inevitable decline of the country's authority as a post-empire, which was declining to the level of a state middle level Already the unprecedentedly innovative nature of Elizabeth II's policy in this area can be considered quite sufficient to define the period of her reign as historical for Britain. The queen made a significant contribution to maintaining the influence of Great Britain on world political processes, despite the seemingly inevitable decline of the country's authority as a post-empire, which was sliding to the level of a middle-level state. Already the unprecedentedly innovative nature of Elizabeth II's policy in this area can be considered quite sufficient to define the period of her reign as historical for Britain. the queen made a significant contribution to maintaining the influence of Great Britain on world political processes, despite the seemingly inevitable decline of the country's authority as a post-empire, which was sliding to the level of a middle-level state. Already the unprecedentedly innovative nature of Elizabeth II's policy in this area can be considered to define the period of her reign as historical for Britain.

70 years of the royal history of Lilibet (as she was unoffially affectionately called in the royal family from childhood, and then Elizabeth in the people) can be fully characterized by the word «first». Her coronation ceremony in Westminster Abbey was unprecedentedly open - at the request of the monarch himself, it was broadcast for the first time on television, which played a significant role in the communications of the new British monarchy. As the queen herself noted, «people have to see me to believe me» [12].

It is no coincidence that her coronation dress was ordered by the heir to the throne herselfwas embroidered with floral emblems of the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations. Elizabeth II became the first monarch in history who, since the beginning of her reign, has spent a unique amount of time in foreign visits - more than 320, which covered more than 130 countries of the world. Unfortunately, Ukraine was not among them.

Already in her first unique six-month tour of Commonwealth states and colonies in 1953-1954, the Queen set the first records - she became the first monarch to visit Australia and New Zealand. In 1961, at the invitation of local authorities, she visited Turkey for the first time, and later, also for the first time, visited India and Pakistan.

Elizabeth II visited most European countries, in particular, she became the first British monarch to visit Ireland (2011). Among the most odious visits with a pronounced political overtones, the historically first visits of the British crown to Yugoslavia (1972, the first communist country visited by the British monarch), China (1986), and Russia (1994) stand out. In 1980, she, head of the Protestant Church of England, made the first official visit of a British monarch to the Vatican to meet with Pope John Paul II [13].

Meanwhile, objective historical processes also showed the limits of the monarchy's influence in the foreign policy of the United Kingdom. The unfolding of the global confrontation of the Cold War period, the anti-colonial movement, the strengthening of regional integration processes, the replacement of the bipolar world system with a multipolar one, the crisis of European integration and the escalation of confrontation along the China-West and Russia-West lines to the level of the «Second Cold War» with the prospect of an open global military of the conflict, the processes of international politics, in which, however, Great Britain occupies unique positions, became not subject to the will of the monarch. The Queen was forced for the first time in the country's history to bless the 40-year «epic of Great Britain's stay in the European Community, including recognizing the results of the Brexit referendum, the consequences of which for both sides are still ambiguously assessed.

No less challenges, achievements and miscalculations awaited the queen and her kingdom at the national level. The main internal challenge for Elizabeth II was the conformity of the institution of the monarchy with modern trends in social and political life. queen elizabeth british monarchy

First of all, we are talking about the further process of steady reduction of its jurisdiction in favor of classic republican authorities (parliament and government), which has been going on since the period of the English revolution of the 17th century. And here the queen again managed to get out of the situation with honor for herself and the royal court, unlike most European monarchs, whose functions remained mostly purely symbolic and ceremonial. The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, the head of the Church of England, the appointment of heads of government, the signing of parliamentary laws, the dissolution and convocation of parliament, the declaration of war and the conclusion of peace, weekly meetings with the prime minister to discuss current issues in the life of society, the state and the international community, giving working audiences to other ministers (at their request) and offcials of member states of the Commonwealth of Nations, regular processing of reports on the work of ministries and diplomatic missions, pardoning convicts, granting titles of nobility, state awards and honors - this is an incomplete list of the preserved functions of the British monarch, which are mostly formal, but under certain conditions, they can give him a suffciently significant influence on the country's politics.

This is especially true in periods of parliamentary instability, when, for example, it is not possible to form a stable single-party or coalition government, or to elect the leader of the ruling party, which allows the monarch to more independently choose a new head of government from the proposed candidates. In the latter case, this was the case during the absence of a clear order of election for the leader of the Conservative Party when choosing between the contenders Richard Butler and Harold Macmillan (1957), the same Butler and Alec Douglas-Hume (1965). As the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who had a dif cult relationship with the Queen, recalled at one time, «I prepared for meetings with her more seriously than for meetings of the Parliament», because the Queen was familiar with most issues and approached their discussion in an extremely professional and responsibly [13].

It was on the example of Thatcher's rule that the queen clearly showed how her authority, contrary to the position of the head of government, could influence state policy. It is, in particular, about the introduction of sanctions against the apartheid regime in the Republic of South Africa. The insistence of Elizabeth II, who directly condemned the violation of human rights in this country, forced the Thatcher government, which was ready to sacrifice principles for trade preferences, to introduce sanctions against the authorities in Pretoria.

Regarding the influence on the work of the Parliament from the last years of the Queen's reign, the most famous fact is the approval of the prorogation (suspension) of its work for up to six weeks in August 2019 at the request of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who thus sought to speed up the Brexit process. Among the most significant cases of blocking of laws adopted by the parliament, we note the blocking of the draft law on military actions in Iraq in 1999, which was supposed to give all the powers to direct the military actions of the parliament [14].

Among the piquant details of the manifestation of Elizabeth Il's political influence on legislative activity is the active use of the “queen's consent” procedure, which allows the monarch to influence the text of laws before they are considered by parliament.

As it turned out, with the help of this procedure, Elizabeth II in her time influenced more than a hundred laws in order to guarantee her inviolability as a private person (in addition to the immunities she has as a monarch) and her property. For example, the police are not allowed to enter the grounds of Balmoral Castle without the monarch's permission to investigate alleged crimes. No other private landowner has such a right.

Elizabeth II became an absolute record holder in the political history of the country - the longest reign of a monarch in the entire history of Great Britain, 8 appointed prime ministers. Since October 2016, after the death of Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej, she has been the world's longest-reigning monarch. In June 2022, Elizabeth II was recognized as the second longest-reigning monarch in world history [3].

The Queen has managed to maintain objectivity and impartiality in dealing with all the leading British political parties. She honed the skill of remaining as impartial as possible and staying above the usual routine of socio-political debates for a parliamentary democracy and a pluralistic society, not to publicly express her position where it was inappropriate, because the monarch traditionally represents the entire nation and the state. Therefore, the queen's political views on a number of issues often remained unclear to the public. The courtiers repeatedly testified that Elizabeth was characterized by an iron will and self-discipline, scrupulousness in the study of state affairs and the organization of the life of the royal court, restraint in emotions. The long reign of the queen repeatedly required her to take a decisive position and at the same time diplomatic skill. This happened during the long armed conflict in Northern Ireland, devolution (increasing the powers of the parliaments of Scotland and Wales), the referendum on Scottish independence in 2014, which almost led to the disintegration of the kingdom (Elizabeth II, as ex-prime minister David Cameron said, was against him), and in the end no less dramatic Brexit events [14].

The reign of Elizabeth II proved that even in the conditions of a limited monarchy, the preservation of real state functions of the royal person often directly depends on her authority in society and political circles. In the maelstrom of political vicissitudes, the Queen seemed to remain an “unbreakable fortress” of stability for the British, and not only for them. She was able to overcome the human pride of the irreconcilability of the conflicting parties and look at the situation from the position of wise maternal care. This policy, in particular, greatly contributed to strengthening the authority of the British Monarchy in the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations - former colonies and dominions. As a demonstrative example, we note the speech of Elizabeth II during her visit to Canada in the Quebec National Assembly in 1964. Ignoring the national-linguistic contradictions of the countrys Englishspeaking and French-speaking population, the queen acted as a peacemaker for “two complementary cultures”, noting that she was happy to have a country in the Commonwealth where French can be offcially spoken.

Positive results for the British Crown regarding the preservation of the monarchical form of government in Australia (1999), the Caribbean states of Tuvalu (2008) and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (2009) are universally acknowledged to have been made possible primarily due to respect for the personality of Elizabeth II. At the same time, during her reign, 17 former colonies and dependent territories of the British Empire renounced the monarchy.

The main principle of its activity is closeness to the people, and not showy. In the course of frequent foreign visits, the queen preferred meetings with ordinary citizens and public representatives of a certain country to visiting important places.

Her first royal outing with ordinary members of the public came during a tour of Australia and New Zealand in 1970, which started a new royal tradition of interacting with subjects. Elizabeth was the patron of more than 600 societies and charitable organizations. The queen's personal responses to some of the letters from people from different parts of the world, which were received by the hundreds every day at the address of Buckingham Palace, have become overgrown with legends, although most of them were true reality [6]. We also have several testimonies of the Queen's response to the appeal, greeting cards with Christmas holidays in response to them from citizens of Ukraine. The combination of the Victorian style of work organization and behavior of the monarch with various manifestations of public openness enabled the queen to win the minds and hearts of the masses in Britain and far beyond its borders. According to a poll conducted by the Sunday Times on the eve of the Queen's golden jubilee in 2002, public trust in the monarch was 80%, and in 2012 (Diamond Jubilee) - a record 90%. First of all, it was about trust in the person of the queen - the «national grandmother», as she was affectionately called in the last decades of the reign, and only then in the institution of the monarch as such. «The Queen is needed for the prosperity of the country» - this is the most popular answer received when asked about the role of Elizabeth II. And this despite the age and train of problems in the royal family. In 2021, according to polls by the Gallup agency, Elizabeth II, at the age of 95, ranked third in the ranking of the most popular women in the world [12].

Paradoxically, it is the private life of the royal family, which is traditionally largely subordinated to state interests, especially when it comes to the successors to the throne, that has become the biggest threat to the stability of Elizabeth II's reign. The Queen's eldest son and Crown Prince Charles, her youngest son Prince Andrew, Charles' youngest son Prince Harry and his wife Meghan became the main disturbers of public sentiment. The real challenge to the authority of the queen was the extreme popular popularity of Lady Diana Spencer, or the Princess of Wales, the wife of Crown Prince Charles. The scandalous history of this marriage and its termination, which lasted in the 1980s and 1990s and troubled neither the royal family nor society for several years after the tragic death of Lady Dee in a plane crash in Paris in May 1997, became a real catalyst for stability and wisdom of Elizabeth II at the same time as mother and head of state [15]. At the same time, it was the betrayal by the future King Charles of his wife and the mother of the two crown princes William and Harry with his longtime passion, and later his wife Camilla Parker, who in 2022, after the coronation of her husband, assumed the position of queen consort, became the detonator of the family scandal that led before divorcing Diana. The main public indignation was caused not so much by Charles' betrayal as by the efforts of the royal family, apparently at the initiative of the queen, to shift the responsibility for the breakup of the marriage to Diana herself, who during the divorce process was already living in a de facto civil marriage with the billionaire Dodi Alfayed, who died together with her in the mentioned car accident. The confrontation with Diana in absentia in an effort to protect the reputation of the crown prince and the belated reaction of Elizabeth II personally to this tragic event became one of the main miscalculations of Her Majesty in domestic politics throughout the history of the long reign, because society was not without reason inclined to blame the persecution of Diana on the queen herself. Over a period of time, passions receded into the past, and the authority of the monarch was restored. The power of tradition won. However, Elizabeth II almost became a victim of her own policy of public openness of the monarch and his family to the people.

After his second marriage, Prince Charles largely restored his reputation as a family man. The growing popularity of his eldest son, Prince William, who, due to his youth and unsullied reputation, was seen by a large part of the public as a much better candidate for the throne, played not the least role in calming the society.

Family scandals continued to accompany the queen until her death, and the tangle of unresolved family disputes and conflicts continues to this day. Despite the threat of image losses, the political talent of the queen was manifested in the fact that the scandals in the royal family, despite the risks to the reputation of the queen herself, in the end produced quite a positive advertising effect. It is about unprecedented openness to the public, which was introduced by Elizabeth II. It all started with her public inauguration upon accession to the throne. The already traditional, hitherto unknown, overactive participation of the queen and the closest members of her family in public events of various levels, social outings, extensive charitable activities, regular presentation of photos and videos from the life of the queen and her family in the media, communication with the press of Elizabeth II herself became an integral part of royal life [13]. Even the case of outsiders entering the queen's bedroom, which happened on July 9, 1982, was «correctly» presented in the media as an element of the piquant openness of the queen's personal life. Therefore, it can be said without exaggeration that the popularity of Elizabeth II was the result not only of her authority as a person, but also of an unrivaled political game and effective PR work with the mass media. The royal family appeared before the strict British public as both a state elite and representatives of the people, not devoid of their own shortcomings and weaknesses. This was often outrageous, but usually liked by the masses and raised the popularity of the British royal family in the world to unprecedented heights. And this made it possible not only to raise the popularity of the monarchy and the queen herself, but also to get a considerable financial profit, especially against the background of regular accusations by supporters of republicanism (the movement for the abolition of the monarchy) of excessive spending from the budget for the maintenance of the royal family.

The change of the monarch, like the change of every ruler, always carries a certain threat to the stability of the government system. In the case of the British monarchy, it is primarily about possible image losses. Charles Ill's accession to the monarchical power has become an accomplished fact, but it is currently widely perceived by the public as ambiguous. A large part of her cannot forget Charles's divorce from Diana. Some chastise him for not abdicating in favor of his young eldest son, Prince William. The rest of the critics reproach him for such character traits as indecisiveness and an overly philosophical nature. At the same time, political scientists and constitutional lawyers blame the new monarch for his tendency to violate the unwritten rule of the British monarchy - noninterference in political processes. In 2015, a scandal erupted over data published in the media about the pressure of then-Crown Prince Charles on Prime Minister Tony Blair (1997-2017) in order to make the «correct» decisions in his opinion. It is primarily about Charles's claims regarding the government's environmental policy, a supporter of which he has long been famous [14]. One thing is clear - it will not be easy for the successor of Elizabeth II, because his activities will somehow be compared with the achievements of the reign of this famous queen.

Will Charles have enough authority and determination to preserve the remnants of the external influence of the British Crown in the form of the Commonwealth of Nations? Will it be possible to maintain the internal consensus as effectively as the predecessors-mothers? Will it be possible to effectively use and possibly multiply the remnants of the monarch's political influence on state life? In the end, will the king be able to put things in order in the royal family, relieve the tension in relations with his younger brother Andrew, and return Harry and Meghan to the royal family bosom? Time will tell all this. After all, given the current economic situation in the country, for the British, with the onset of winter, the sums in payments for energy carriers will probably become more urgent than news about the life of the king and his family [15].

Conclusions

The period of the reign of Charles III will be a transitional, reforming stage in the history of the British monarchy from the unique and unique period of Elizabeth II, who started the process of its renewal, to the reign of her grandson William, today the Prince of Wales. It will not only be about the person of the monarch, but also about qualitative changes in the modernization of the Crown institution, which are dictated by time. Charles III has already outlined the main principle of the transformations - devotion to the key principles of monarchical rule, among which will definitely remain closeness to the people, greater openness and social responsibility, which the king himself has been a champion of for decades as a well-known benefactor and patron. He has long been famous for his views on “cheapening” the monarchy, expanding the monarch's religious communication beyond the jurisdiction of the Church of England (in particular, allowing the heirs to the throne to marry Catholics), deepening gender equality (adopting an amendment to allow the monarch's first-born child to hold the throne regardless of gender), which now will have a good opportunity to implement. The evolution of the political system of Great Britain can provide new opportunities for the monarchy. Taking into account the modernization of the country's electoral law, which is moving towards the replacement of the traditional but outdated majoritarian system with a proportional one and the diversification of the party-political spectrum, the monarch may well play the role of an independent mediator in inter-party negotiations regarding the formation of the next parliamentary majority.

First of all, it is important that Charles has a clear and active civic and political position, which the king is not going to compromise. This is extremely good for Ukraine in today's conditions of resistance to Russian imperial aggression. Charles, as a highly educated person, a qualified art critic and historian, has long been familiar with the basics of Ukrainian culture and the state-building tradition. A photo of the diaspora life of Ukrainians in Great Britain from 1981 became widely known, in which Prince Charles dances hopak together with the soloists of the Ukrainian ansamble “Hoverla”. In 1996, at the stage of the formation of interstate British-Ukrainian relations, Charles visited Ukraine, visited Kyiv and Sevastopol, where soldiers of the British Royal Navy once died. Since the beginning of Russian aggression in 2014, Charles, unlike Queen Elizabeth, has been unequivocally critical of Moscow's actions, and once in a private conversation he even compared Putin's policy to Hitler's policy. It seems that he will never be forgiven in the Kremlin. In March 2022, Charles openly condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine and said that it was a war against democracy and freedom, which his late mother never allowed herself for reasons of principle. Apparently, she recognized the error of her decision to receive Putin with honors at Buckingham Palace during his official visit to Great Britain in 2003. After ascending to the throne, we expect more public restraint from King Charles III regarding the situation in Ukraine.

However, his personal human and political positions will silently remain unchanged, as will the active support of Ukraine by the people of Great Britain, the development of interstate alliance relations, the tone of which was set by Elizabeth II.

References

1. Yakovenko, N. (2003). Velyka Brytaniia v suchasnii systemi mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn: zaiavka nayevropeiske liderstvo [Great Britain in the modern system of international relations: application for European leadership]. Kyiv: Naukovyi svit [in Ukrainian].

2. Yehor Brailian. Narodna Koroleva: yak uviide v istoriiu Elizabet II [People's Queen: how Elizabeth II will go down in history]. Retrieved from https://broadcast.net.ua/ru/news-broadcast/7328-narodna-koroleva-iak- uviide-v-istoriiu-elizabet-ii [in Ukrainian].

3. Krushynskyi, V. (2003). Brytanska Yevropachy YevropeiskaBrytaniia. Velykobrytaniia v yevropeiskykh intehratsiinykh protsesakh [British Europe or European Britain. Great Britain in European integration processes]. Kyiv: Kyivskyi universytet [in Ukrainian].

4. Hrubinko, A. (2005). Ukrainsko-brytanski vidnosyny 1991-2004 [Ukrainian-British relations 1991-2004]. Ternopil: Vydavnychyi viddil TNPU im. V. Hnatiuka [in Ukrainian].

5. Oleh Pavliuk (2022). Koroleva, yaku pamiatatymut u Brytanii ta v Ukraini: naivazhlyvishe pro Yelyzavetu II [The Queen who will be remembered in Britain and Ukraine: the most important thing about Elizabeth II]. Yevropeiska Pravda - European Truth, 8 veresnia 2022. URL: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/ articles/2022/ 09/8/7146436/ [in Ukrainian].

6. Bedell Smith, Sally (2017). Elizabeth the Queen: The Woman Behind the Throne [Elizabeth the Queen: The Woman Behind the Throne]. London: Penguin Books [in English].

7. Blek, Dzh (2008). Ystoryia brytanskykh ostrovov [History of British islands] / perevod Ivanov S. Moskva: Evrazyia [in Russian].

8. Bond, Jennie (2006). Elizabeth: Eighty Glorious Years [Elizabeth: Eighty Glorious Years]. London: Carlton Publishing Group [in English].

9. Bradford, Sarah (2012). Queen Elizabeth: her life in our times by, 1938- [Queen Elizabeth: her life in our times by, 1938-]. London: Viking [in English].

10. Britain, the Commonwealth and Europe. The Commonwealth and Britains Applications to join the European Communities [Britain, the Commonwealth and Europe. The Commonwealth and Britain's Applications to join the European Communities] (2001). / ed. by A. May. London [in English].

11. Velykobrytanyia: epokha reform [Great Britain: the era of reforms] (2007) / pod. red. Al.A. Hrombiko. Moskva: Ves Myr [in Russian].

12. Uliana Vynohradova. Yelyzaveta II ta sim rekordiv Hinnesa. U chomu Yii Velychnist Koroleva obiishla vsikh [Elizabeth II and seven Guinness records. In what Her Majesty the Queen surpassed everyone]. Obozre- vatel. 8.09.2022. https://news.obozrevatel.com/ukr/show/people/elizaveta-ii-ta-sim-rekordiv-ginnesa-u-chomu-ii-velichnist-koroleva-obijshla-vsih.htm?fbclid=IwAR1X-HUIw7KcZaiVLxSfNVN85WU0VhY0L-Lzo4bZSBoSqjieGgEKxMM4bU [in Ukrainian].

13. 'Yehor Brailian. Yakym monarkhom mozhe buty Charlz III? [What kind of monarch can Charles III be?]. URL: https://armyinform.com.ua/2022/09/12/yakym-monarhom-mozhe-buty-charlz-iii/?fbclid=IwAR1J7P MnUCKJlUtf7lOVDKN-FaNSTjeqe2K47Wf74UlxxWV qFwN0LTaEhdM [in Ukrainian].

14. Volodymyr Kurennoi. Lamannia tradytsii ta pidtrymka Ukrainy: shcho vidomo pro novoho korolia Velykoi Brytanii [Breaking traditions and supporting Ukraine: what is known about the new king of Great Britain]. 9 veresnia 2022. URL: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/articles/2022/09/9/7146485/ [in Ukrainian].

15. Pravlinnia Charlza III - lyshe perekhidnyi etap u brytanskii monarkhii [The reign of Charles III is only a transitional stage in the British monarchy], - korespondent Kovach. 19 veresnia, 2022. URL: HTTPS:// ESPRESO.TV/PRAVLINNYA-CHARLZA-III-LISHE-PEREKHIDNIY-ETAP-U-BRITANSKIY-MONAR- KHII-KORESPONDENT-KOVACH [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru