The United Kingdom likes the state crises, from Brexit to Megxit
After Brexit came the Megxit. Two state crises with the same language: transition period, negotiation and exit. The United Kingdom, the world's fifth economy, seems determined to make problems: the territorial unit – the diabolical Scottish referendum called by David Cameron -, the uncertainty of Brexit and now the monarchy, with the decision of the Dukes of Sussex, Enrique and Meghan Markle, to "step back" in his obligations as members of the royal family and move to live – with financial independence – to North America. On Wednesday of last week the couple issued a public note: "After many months of internal reflections and discussions, we have chosen to make a transition this year and begin to gradually design a new role within the institution." The British press swung in its chronicles between the surprise of the rest of the family members and the "fury" of Queen Elizabeth II.
Unlike what happened during Brexit – where she has kept a discreet role – Isabel II, with her 93 springs and 70 years on the throne, has taken charge of the matter personally. Quickly. In a statement issued on Monday – with unusual concessions to sentimentalism in it – the head of the British State said that “although we would have preferred to continue being members of the Royal Family full time, we respect and understand their desire to live a more independent life as a family while they continue to be a valuable part of my family. ”
“It has been agreed that there will be a transition period in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the United Kingdom. These are complex matters that my family has to solve and there is more work to be done, but I have asked that the final decisions be reached in the next few days, ”concluded the sovereign in the note issued after the summit at the Sandringham House offices. The summit brought together the hard core of the crown: the queen, Prince Charles and Prince William. And the protagonist of the scared, Enrique (his wife and little Archie were in Canada, she entered by videoconference). The British media said yesterday that they had seen leaving the private residence of Norfolk County to the Duke of Edinburgh, the 98 already fulfilled: he did not have to be there.
Hours before Guillermo and Enrique had issued a statement out of step with information from the Times in which he assured that the Dukes of Cambridge had "bullying" those of Sussex. “Despite the clear denials, today a false story has been published in a newspaper in the United Kingdom that speculated about the relationship between the Duke of Sussex and Duke of Cambridge. For the brothers, who care so much about mental illness, the use of this language is offensive and potentially harmful, ”read the note issued by a real spokesman.
The progressive withdrawal of the couple opens the debate on how to proceed in cases like this one in which members of the royal family choose in the future to do the same and abandon the first line of obligations. Windors want to establish a protocol. And the queen, as head of the family and with apparently intact mental conditions, wanted to establish them. What is happening with the Dukes of Sussex is also not a novelty in the British royal family: last November Prince Andrew, second son of Queen Elizabeth II, announced that “he took a step back in his public duties for the future next". It was undoubtedly forced – unlike the case of the Dukes of Sussex -, following the interview granted to the BBC in which he referred to his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, accused of having abused dozens of minors.
But the devil dwells in the details. Behind the false closure of the crisis with the statement of the queen of this Monday many are the aspects that still have to be elucidated: who will pay the security of the couple in Canada, what commitments they will have from now on, what will happen with the money public invested in the conditioning of the Sussex residence in London, their titles, to what extent they can be financially independent and where they will work, and so on. Many are the questions? Will Enrique remain sixth in the line of the throne? The Dukes of Sussex claim to be financially independent, but the risk of being accused of monetizing the royal brand is there. Apparently the couple will continue to have Frogmore Cottage as a residence in London, in which 3 million pounds have been invested recently on behalf of the British taxpayer. A taxpayer – unlike what happens in other latitudes – that is taken very seriously until the last penny spent.
Monarchists, Republicans and indifferent are clear in the United Kingdom that the institution is much more than the mere head of state, which is not little. It is an asset at the service of the country. What in other prose is called today Country Brand. In its traditional pragmatism and phlegm, British society – with its institutions, its press, etc. – knows that the public debate and the presence of the Windsor in the papers is a proud example of good democratic health. Aerate their miseries, address them with the usual acidity in the UK press, in short, make it clear that the royal family has the same problems as the rest of the families is also good for their own survival.
From crisis to crisis until the final resurgence. In much worse problems the monarchical institution in the United Kingdom has been seen and, fortunately for the Windsor, has ended up solving them. From ‘annus horribilis’ they are cured of horror. Nothing suggests that Buckhingham Palace will not succeed in the nce Meghxit ’trance, no doubt less passionate and existential than other crises in which the islands have been engulfed.