Kate and William’s wedding would probably be over before the British wake up and ask themselves: what was the fuss all about? Friday, April 29, 2011, will go down as a date when probably the next king of England and his princess sow the proverbial marriage knot at Westminster Abbey. Just like the royals before the newlyweds, each will take his or her place in the annals of history, one born with the silver spoon in his mouth, the other attaining the silver spoon through marital agreement. While the average Briton lives in challenging economic times, the British Monarch has deem it fit to throw a once in a life time wedding party, costing over eighty million dollars for a Prince and his bride. Bravo, what a way to empty the nation’s coffer while keeping the people in a fiery or la-la-la land! Before I rain on someone’s parade, let me get off here and discuss the political implication of the withdrawal of the invitation to the wedding of the Ambassador of Syria. However, not until I mention the marital power play in royal weddings and compare two royal weddings at the same church, thirty years apart.
The 1981 Royal wedding afforded the upper crust of the British society to smooch with Kings, Queens, Princes, Princess, Presidents and Prime Ministers, Top Military Brasses, Foreign diplomats and leaders of the Church and Businesses. The 2011 Royal wedding would do the same, even if at somewhat of a nostalgic comparison, the 2011 version of the fanfare will be more of a wall-to-wall display of mature interaction between two adults who are in love. The 1981 Royal wedding was probably between a groom who was in love with a different woman than the one he had at the altar; and, a novice 19-year old, who hardly knew, and who ended up being a sacrificial lamb to the monarchy. The 2011 Royal wedding is probably between a man and woman who consider themselves equals or pairs, while the 1981 Royal wedding was between a mature adult and a beautiful teenager trying to find her feet in the world. Frankly, the whole thing about the 1981 Royal wedding was fake, fake to the bone. What a Tragedy! So, for those who are watching the 2011 drama unfold let them understand that a similar drama took place at the same venue thirty-years ago, but with different actors.
Can we ever have equality in a marriage between a king-to-be and a commoner? It depends on who you talk to. If you consult a marriage counselor, she or he, would probably tell you that marriage is a power game! One person is dominating the other party, who wants to be dominated. Within a marriage, is often a power game that if one is unwilling to continue to be the foot mat, the power shifts that takes place, may consummate in the dissolution of the marriage. Much as Kate Middleton may attempt to see herself of equal status to Prince William, the power game and societal perceptions, including the overbearing influence of the monarchy, make it difficult. To prevent Prince Williams from being seen as the domineering one, he may pitch in to clean up at home after his new wife or future children; however, the public still wants him to be domineering! No Briton wants a sheepish or woman’s apron for a King! As sexist as the last two sentences are, they are unfortunately the truth, whenever a royal goes into wedding with a commoner, in a male-oriented or male-dominated society. For example, no one is seeing Prince Williams take the name: Middleton; rather, it is Kate that is submitting her last name to the future king.
Enough of bad blood, let’s get to the real discussion about the politics of first invitation, then, no invitation. Almost about a month ago when the invitation to the wedding between Kate and William went out, the Syrian government, through its representative in London, the Syrian Ambassador, probably felt the British Monarchy and government are according her equal disposition and recognition in the committee of nations. The coveted invitation to the wedding of Prince William and the St. Andrews University’s Art History degree holder was probably the talk of town in the diplomatic circle. Then came the spring of the Arab world, and so many given started to give way: major crackdown of Democratic seeking people led to irresponsible killings of the innocent souls yearning for freedom, after over forty-years of one party and one family rule over a people of Assyria. Muslims and Christians in Syria saw and experienced the brutality of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The world saw a man who once called for peace in the Middle East in 2009 in the presence of King Abdullah of Jordan; unleash terror on his own people.
In addition to the terror in the outskirts of Damascus, the Syrians saw the other side of a leader who is willing and bent on destroying those he swore to protect and lead. A leader, who continues to weaken political moderates among its citizens, sent out a network of terror machines to the outskirt of the capital of the nation of Syria, to ensure there are no dissenters. With over four hundred and fifty Syrians reported dead from the hands of a tyrant, the extensive support that Assad had received from the Arab world, started to dwindle. The world was dismayed and under somewhat of a tight fist, began to see what Tyrant Bashar al-Assad, is willing to unleash on his people. Not to be reckoned as accomplices, many leaders in the west started to talk about sanctions and the possibilities of closing the financial conduit to al-Assad government. The west, which have often preached representative constitutionality and pledged equality of groups in their domain, saw no room to wiggle out, but to use all instruments within their power to send a clear message to Damascus that their brutality will not be overlooked. Just as President Obama was announcing that his government is looking into all possible means to impact the government of Syria, the British Monarchy, yanked the invitation to the Royal wedding from its ambassador. Good radiance to bad rubbish, I can hear from 10 Downing Street!
Although this invitation withdrawal seems to create a unified front from the west against a government whose actions have gone beyond civil, the worst violence and probably the most harmful ones are still to come. Two days ago, just as the United States government was threatening sanctions against Syrian government and the United Nations drafting statements condemning the violence in the nation, over 4000 strong military and security forces equipped with tanks, moved into the Southern city of Daraa, Syria, early in the morning, mowing down their citizens, indiscriminately. The new assault from President a-Assad was probably meant to scare some people or destroy the nation’s psyche from any effort to gain their freedom. Now, how about that for a man who held hands with other members of the Organization of Islamic State, to preach peace among Arab states and the rest of the world?
By default, the withdrawal of the invitation to Kate and William’s Royal wedding is a political statement or development telling the President of Syria that, no one is willing to accommodate his barbarism; and, is meant as an encouragement to the citizens of the nation, that the rest of the world is watching. If the international community’s effort does not yield any result, at least it is on record that as Britons celebrates the marital bliss of one of their princes with another commoner, the plight of the underclass, are not overlooked. Those advocating for a Republic in Britain had better watch out, there are times when the monarchy that is perceived as being very offish and inconsiderate, do have a soft and compassionate flair and love.
So, as we celebrate the royal wedding with Prince William and Princess Kate, let us remember that there is a nation out there, whose invitation to the royal wedding was withdrawn; and, which probably is contemplating killing its own people as the British and their monarchs eat caviar, drink sweet wines, top them with royally lofty cakes and sing the Union Jack! Long Live the Queen and Kings, to come!
No comments:
Post a Comment