未来の予兆か、カリブ海諸国で英王子夫妻迎えた抗議デモ

【ＡＦＰ＝時事】英国のウィリアム王子夫妻のカリブ海諸国歴訪は、祖母エリザベス女王の在位７０年をたたえる記念行事だった。だが、英国君主初の「プラチナ・ジュビリー」を英連邦諸国と共に祝賀するという計画は、すべて予定通りとはいかなかった。（写真はジャマイカの首都キングストンの英大使館前で、過去の奴隷貿易への賠償と謝罪を求める人々）
　ウィリアム王子とキャサリン妃は、英王室の富を築いた一因である奴隷貿易について謝罪し、過去の罪を償うよう求める声に直面した。
　バハマ国家賠償委員会は、英王室は奴隷の「血と汗と涙」から利益を得てきたとして賠償を要求。英国に植民地化された地域は何世紀にもわたり「略奪・搾取された」結果、今なお開発途上にあると訴えた。
　ジャマイカではアンドリュー・ホルネス首相がテレビで、同国は独立国として「前進」しているとウィリアム王子に語った。昨年のバルバドスに続きエリザベス女王を元首とする立憲君主制を廃止し、共和制に移行する可能性を示唆したものだ。
　アフリカ系住民の地位向上やアフリカ回帰を唱えるジャマイカの思想運動「ラスタファリ運動」のレゲエ詩人（ダブ・ポエット）、ムタバルーカさんは現地紙ジャマイカ・オブザーバーに、「共和制に移行しても食べ物の値段は変わらない。でも、人々の考え方や意識に心理的に影響する」 「私たちが自らをどう見るかという内面的な意義がある」と指摘した。
　首都キングストンの小売店経営者、タメカ・トーマスさんは「今こそ変わる時だ。エリザベス女王は、ジャマイカではなく英国の女王だ。英国にとどまるべきだ」と率直に語った。
■謝罪しない英王室
　奴隷貿易において英王室が極めて重要な役割を果たしたのは、エリザベス１世が奴隷商人ジョン・ホーキンスを後援した１６世紀にさかのぼる。
　１７世紀にはチャールズ２世が奴隷貿易の拡大を奨励し、後にジェームズ２世として王位に就く弟と共に、私財を投じて奴隷貿易会社「王立アフリカ会社」を設立した。
　英国は１８０７年に大西洋をまたいだ奴隷貿易を禁止。１８３３年に領内全域で廃止した。
　現代の英王室は過去の奴隷貿易にしばしば言及しており、直近ではバルバドスでチャールズ皇太子が「恐ろしい残虐行為」「人類史に残る永遠の汚点」と表現。ジャマイカでは、ウィリアム王子が父の言葉を引用して「深い悲しみ」を表明し、奴隷制は「忌まわしい」慣習で「起きてはならないことだった」と述べた。
　しかし、これまでのところ正式な謝罪はなされていない。
■英王室は「空気を読め」
　英王立歴史学会の副会長で、奴隷制の歴史と記憶が専門の英ブリストル大学のオリベット・オテレ教授は、カリブ海諸国での抗議デモについて「予想外ではなかった」と述べている。
　オテレ教授は、世界的な「Ｂｌａｃｋ　Ｌｉｖｅｓ　Ｍａｔｔｅｒ（黒人の命は大切）」運動や、英国で奴隷貿易に関与した人物の像や記念碑の撤去を求める動きが広がっていること、第２次世界大戦後に合法的に英国に移住した「ウィンドラッシュ世代」と呼ばれるカリブ系移民の子孫が不法滞在者として拘束されたり強制退去を迫られたりした問題など、ウィリアム王子夫妻の訪問前にさまざまな論争が起きていた点を指摘。
　「謝罪だけでは足りない。謝罪は重要な一歩でしかない」「昨今の人々はもっと多くを求め、変化を期待している。過去と現在が関連していることを知っている」とした上で、英王室と英政府はその二つを結び付けておらず、償いの方法をめぐる協議にも参加していないと続けた。
　米紙ワシントン・ポストは、ウィリアム王子夫妻の訪問を「植民地ツアー」と称し、時代遅れの魅力攻勢で「むしろ侮辱的だった」と批判する寄稿を掲載している。
　英王室は「空気を読む必要がある」とオテレ教授は言う。
　「状況は変わりつつある。（今回の訪問の）目的がこれからも英女王を元首と仰ぐようカリブ海諸国を引き留めることだったなら、現地にはもっと広範な議論があることを英王室は理解していなかったのではないか」
　「対処すべきは不平等、貧困、過去の遺産だ」とオテレ教授は語り、「プラチナ・ジュビリーは英国では素晴らしいことかもしれないが、カリブ海諸国の現状に目を向けずに祝賀を期待するのは問題がある」との見方を示した。【翻訳編集ＡＦＰＢＢＮｅｗｓ】
〔ＡＦＰ＝時事〕（2022/04/01-13:44）

Prince William's trip to the Caribbean was meant to help Commonwealth countries where his 95-year-old grandmother is also head of state celebrate her record-breaking 70 years on the throne.
But what were designed to be carefully choreographed photocalls and public appearances for Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee did not go entirely to plan.
Instead, William, 39, and his wife Catherine, 40, faced calls to apologise for the slave trade that help make his ancestors' fortunes and to atone for the sins of the past.
The Bahamas National Reparations Committee said Britain's royals had benefited from the blood, sweat and tears of slaves and called for reparations.
Colonised lands and people had been looted and pillaged by the UK monarchy over centuries, leaving them under-developed in the modern age, it added.
In Jamaica, meanwhile, Prime Minister Andrew Holness pointedly told the Duke of Cambridge -- as he is formally known -- in front of television cameras that the nation was moving on as an independent country.
By doing so, he gave William's father Prince Charles another indication of what he could face when he is king, after Barbados became a republic last year.
On the streets of Jamaica's capital, Kingston, the Rastafarian dub poet Mutabaruka said ditching the queen would make little difference to ordinary people.
Making Jamaica a republic will not change the price of food but it has a psychological implication on the mind and the consciousness of the people, he told the Jamaica Observer newspaper.
It has an internal significance to how we view ourselves.
Shop owner Tameka Thomas put it more bluntly. It's time to change now. Queen Elizabeth is queen in England, not Jamaica. She should stay in England, she told AFP.
- No apology -
British royals' pivotal role in the slave trade goes back to the 16th century, when the first queen Elizabeth sponsored one of its first major proponents, John Hawkins.
King Charles II in the 1600s encouraged the expansion of the trade and with his brother, the future king James II, invested private funds in the Royal African Company.
The company transported hundreds of thousands of men, women and children from the continent across the Atlantic. Many were branded with the company's initials.
King George III's son, who became king William IV, opposed slavery abolitionists but was unsuccessful. Britain banned the transatlantic slave trade in 1807 and in all its territories in 1833.
Modern royals have addressed slavery in the past, most recently in Barbados, when Charles called it an appalling atrocity... which forever stains our history.
In Jamaica, William echoed his father's words, expressing his profound sorrow and calling the practice abhorrent. It should never have happened, he said.
But so far, no formal apology has been made.
The visit came as Britain increasingly confronts its colonial past, in particular its memorials to historical figures.
Last December, four people were cleared of criminal damage after a statue of a 17th century slave trader was toppled during a Black Lives Matter anti-racism protest in Bristol.
Just this week, a Cambridge University college was told its bid to remove a memorial to a donor who had links to the Royal African Company was unsuccessful.
- 'Read the room' -
For Olivette Otele, professor of the history of slavery and memory of enslavement at the University of Bristol, the protests were not unexpected.
She noted various contentions foreshadowed the visit, including the global Black Lives Matter movement, the debate back home, and anger at treatment of Caribbean migrants who moved to Britain after World War II.
Thousands of the so-called Windrush generation were later wrongfully detained or deported, despite having arrived legally.
Apologies have never been enough. They are an important step, said Otele.
Nowadays people want to see more. They want to see change. They know there's a relationship between past and present.
But the royal family and the British government had not made that link and were not part of any meaningful conversation about how to make amends, she added.
One of numerous critics writing in the Washington Post called the visit a colonial tour and outdated charm offensive that was more offensive than charming.
Otele, a vice-president of the Royal Historical Society, said the royals need to read the room.
Things are changing. If it (the visit) is about keeping these countries and the queen as head of state, they might not have understood there is a broader debate there, she noted.
It's about inequalities, about poverty and the legacies of the past.
As wonderful as the jubilee might be here, it seems awkward to expect people to celebrate without looking at what's happening there.