Starmer cannot afford to get into a bind over reparations

Rakib Ehsan, The Independent

News that Commonwealth leaders gathered in Samoa for the biennial heads of government meeting (CHOGM) are preparing to defy the UK by putting “reparatory justice” on the summit’s agenda, means prime minister Sir Keir Starmer must reassert his lines in the sand — no to financial reparations over colonialism, and no to apologising for the transatlantic slave trade.

A report published last year by the University of West Indies, backed by Jamaican jurist Patrick Robinson, concluded that the UK owed in the region of £18 trillion in reparations. To put this in perspective, in cash terms, the UK’s gross domestic product for the whole of 2023 amounted to £2.7 trillion.

Back in 2018, Starmer’s current foreign secretary, David Lammy, said: “As Caribbean people enslaved, colonised and invited to Britain (...) we remember our history. We don’t just want an apology, we want reparations and compensation.”

But serving in the UK government and holding one of the great offices of state comes with the very real responsibility of prioritising the British national interest — irrespective of one’s own ancestral background. It also means appreciating mainstream sentiments in both the UK and significant Commonwealth allies which were also former British colonies.

A new report by Policy Exchange found that the majority of Britons — 60 per cent — believe that throughout history, the UK has been a force for good overall. Another publication by the organisation found that the Indian public is overwhelmingly of the view that the UK does more good than harm in the world. The majority of the Nigerian public followed suit.

It is worth noting that India represents three-fifths of the Commonwealth’s population, while Nigeria is Africa’s most-populated country. These sentiments, home and abroad, should inform how the UK not only approaches its own history, but also how it views itself in the post-colonial international system.

The UK government — and the wider Commonwealth — cannot afford to get into a tangle over the issue of reparatory justice. While all three candidates vying to replace Baroness Scotland as the Commonwealth’s secretary general are from Africa and have expressed support for reparations, it may be wise for them to tread carefully.

There is no denying the UK’s participation in the slave trade — neither can the role of powerful and wealthy African kingdoms in selling slaves to European merchants be overlooked. In the early 18th century, the kings of Dahomey (current-day Benin) became major players in the slave trade. King Gezo, who reigned from 1818 to 1858, once said: “The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth.” Indeed, he said that he would do anything the British wanted — apart from forsaking the slave trade.

The Yoruba and Asante elites — of present-day Nigeria and Ghana respectively — were also heavily involved in slave-trading activities. Groups such as the Nyamwezi of Tanzania would serve as militant “intermediaries”, waging war to capture people for export as slaves.

Simplistic discussion of reparations also overlooks Britain’s unique historical role in abolishing the slave trade — from the actions of the West Africa Squadron to its insistence on shutting down the slave markets of Zanzibar. Keir Starmer is correct to highlight the risk of the Commonwealth trapping itself into “very, very long, endless discussions about reparations” and that focusing on “current future-facing challenges” is a more worthwhile use of time, energy and resources.

At the heart of this should be making the very most of the Commonwealth’s in-built trade and investment advantages due to a common language, parity of legal systems and compatible administrative regimes.