The death of Queen Elizabeth II marks the end of an era for Britain- and, in many ways, the world. With the loss of its beloved monarch, Britain faces the challenge of maintaining its soft-power influence around the globe. Can King Charles III successfully continue his mother’s legacy? Who wants the monarchy to succeed, and who wants it to fail? Robert Pszczel, former head of NATO’s Information Office in Moscow, was TVP World’s guest invited to shed more light on the matter.
Mr Pszczel was asked what the British monarch signified to him and he recollected the time he spent some time in the UK in the late 1970s. To someone who came to the UK from a communist country, it was quite fascinating to observe both the longevity and the tradition behind the monarchy and how at the same time how it was evolving in the period of the booming counterculture that that decade is known for now.
He stressed the phenomenon that was the rule of Elizabeth II. After all, she met more presidents and heads of state than any other British monarch before. But in his estimate, the key to the great esteem Elizabeth II was held in was not so much her position as the monarch but the person that she was. And her perseverance. Even in 1992, the “annus horribilis”, when the royal residence in Windsor Castle burned down and her children’s marriages were collapsing in an atmosphere of scandal did not break her. She stood up to the challenge and managed to keep it together and maintain the relevancy of the monarchy.
Mr Pszczel also discussed the anti-monarchical sentiment and how they appear to often correlate with other worldviews; King Charles's preparedness to reign; and the future of the monarchy.