King Charles is about to meet Trump and the timing could not be worse

London: King Charles seemed to work wonders when he hosted Donald Trump at Windsor Castle last year during a state visit that was generally judged to be an outstanding success.

The King honoured the US president and his wife, Melania, with a trip through the town on horse-drawn carriages, ensured full honours from the royal guards and threw a lavish banquet for 160 guests.

“The ocean may still divide us, but in so many other ways we are now the closest of kin,” the King told the president in his remarks to the state banquet about the ties between their two countries.

Trump appeared to soften as the hours passed at Windsor. The next day, at a press conference with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, he was all smiles when they outlined trade and business deals meant to be worth billions of dollars.

Six months later, Trump is about to return the honour by hosting the King and Queen Camilla on a state visit that will include a banquet at the White House, a garden party and a ceremonial military review.

And the timing could not be worse. Trump regularly complains about Starmer’s refusal to back the war with Iran, and he mocks the “toys” of the Royal Navy. A few months ago, he caused deep offence among veterans by saying, falsely, that allied troops “stayed a little back” from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While the King managed a smooth visit for Trump last September, there are grave doubts about the wisdom of the imminent royal visit to America. The war in Iran presents an immense challenge, while the president’s mood swings add an element of risk to every occasion.

The most compelling case against the visit came from journalist and former BBC broadcaster David Dimbleby two weeks ago, and his argument has gained force with every intemperate remark from the president since then.

“We’re dealing with a president who is a narcissist and a bully, and he’s been bullying Britain,” said Dimbleby, who began his career at the BBC in the 1960s and hosted election night coverage in the UK for decades.

“He’s been rude about the armed forces, about our role in Afghanistan. The King is head of the armed forces, and I think a rebuke of some kind is necessary.”

Dimbleby’s most recent documentary, What’s the Monarchy For?, was released last December and considered the role of the royal family. He has covered the monarchy for years and knows that the King will be acting for the government, and the country, by flying to America. He thinks Trump does not warrant this show of respect.

“I think it’s a misuse of the King, who has to do what he’s told by the government, but I think it’s giving Trump more than he deserves,” he told the BBC on March 31.

“Our relationship with the United States is not one of mutual affection. It’s a deal. It always has been. It was a deal in the First World War, when they came in late. It was a deal in the Second World War, when they waited until Pearl Harbor happened.

“It’s always been a negotiated deal. The relationship has been a good one, but it’s not as if we’re sort of bonded with friendship.”

Dimbleby reached this conclusion before Trump said Iranians would be “living in hell” if they did not open the Strait of Hormuz (his threat on April 5) and before he declared a “civilisation will die” in Iran (on April 6). He was also speaking before Trump announced a ceasefire with Iran and told Israel to stop bombing Lebanon.

Who knows what will happen before Charles and Camilla head to America on April 27 for their four-day trip. They are due to attend several events at the White House, including a state dinner, and the King will address the Congress. They will go to New York to meet some of the families of those who died in the September 11 attacks in 2001. Later, they will travel to Virginia, where the King will go to a national park to meet Indigenous communities.

In a sense, the entire visit is a gamble on the progress of the war.

It may give Trump an incentive to prevent a further outbreak of hostilities so he can claim to be a peacemaker – and bask in the glow of royal favour. The risk is that Charles and Camilla will be sitting at a garden party at the White House while Trump potentially unleashes more missiles against Tehran and complains that Britain and other NATO allies are refusing to help.

The British public is leaning towards Dimbleby’s argument. Polling company YouGov released figures on March 26 showing that 49 per cent of voters were opposed to the trip. Another 33 per cent said it should go ahead, with others unsure.

Two of the main political parties, the Greens and the Liberal Democrats, have come out against the visit, and they clearly reflect their supporters. The YouGov poll found that 70 per cent of Greens voters and 65 per cent of Lib Dems opposed the visit, while Conservative voters were split.

In a reflection on Starmer’s judgment, 62 per cent of Labour voters were against the visit – even as he insists it is a good idea. The only group strongly in favour were voters who back Reform UK and its populist leader Nigel Farage: 63 per cent of these voters said it should go ahead.

There are good reasons for this state occasion, given this year is the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

There is talk of the Prince and Princess of Wales also visiting the US this year; both showed all the signs of getting along well with Trump last year. But a former British ambassador to the US, Sir Peter Westmacott, told The Times last month that the visit was “problematic” because of the war and should be delayed.

If the visit goes well, the King will have brought Britain and its former colony closer together in exactly the way he described at Windsor last September, when he relied heavily on sentiment to tighten the ties.

The case in favour of the visit centres on the strategic importance of the security relationship – including ties that have huge implications for Australia, such as the Five Eyes intelligence partnership and the AUKUS pact. But this case is weakened by any study of Trump since he was feted at Windsor Castle.

Six months after that visit, Trump seems even angrier with the UK over the alliance. He has fallen out with Starmer and disparaged Britain’s military capacity. There is no greater depth to the relationship. In fact, there only seems to be greater danger.

Worse, the big claims from last year are yet to turn into action. One of the announcements was a mammoth US investment in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, civil nuclear energy and data centres. This “tech prosperity deal” was said to be worth billions of dollars in American investment in Britain. Much of it was postponed in December.

If last year’s visit is yet to deliver on security and the economy, what is the point of this year’s visit? Perhaps the King will merely hand Trump the gift of royal pageantry, something the president appears to adore. And perhaps there will be nothing for Britain in return.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.