Details unveiled for Trump's unprecedented second state visit with King
The decision to proceed directly with a "bells and whistles" state visit, as reported by The Times, comes amid suggestions that the King and the US president's demanding schedules precluded an initial informal gathering over the summer.
However, the Palace had reportedly hoped for a more gradual approach, building towards the grander event.
Concerns within the Palace are said to include Mr Trump's previous threat to designate Canada as the 51st US state – a matter of particular relevance given King Charles's role as the monarch of Canada.
In an attempt to facilitate a less formal introduction, King Charles personally suggested a meeting at Balmoral or Dumfries House in Scotland.
This invitation was conveyed in a letter delivered to Mr Trump by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer during a visit to the Oval Office in February.
But it is understood that, although all options were explored, there were logistical challenges surrounding an informal visit, with complexities in both the King and Mr Trump's diaries meaning a private meeting was not possible over the course of the summer months.
The diary issues come despite the King heading to Scotland for his summer break each year, and Mr Trump being expected to visit his new, second golf course in Aberdeenshire when it opens this summer.
It is said that the logistical reasons why the private meeting cannot precede the state visit are understood and appreciated by all parties.
Formal planning for the official state visit has now begun.
The Manu Regia, the hand-signed formal invitation from the monarch to Mr Trump for a second state visit, was hand-delivered last week by British representatives from the Washington embassy to the White House.
A Palace aide said: 'His Majesty has known President Trump for many years and looks forward to hosting him and the First Lady later this year.'
The exact dates of Mr Trump's stay will be announced in due course, but September is said to be the most likely.
The politician was already feted with a grand state visit to the UK, hosted by the late Queen at Buckingham Palace in 2019.
Precedent for second-term US presidents who have already made a state visit is usually tea or lunch with the monarch at Windsor Castle, as was the case for George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
But Mr Trump is being treated with an unprecedented second state visit for a US president, this time at Windsor.
The Times suggested Sir Keir was hoping to prioritise his attempt to curry favour with Mr Trump and capitalise on the president's fascination with the royal family.
A Number 10 spokesman said: 'It's a matter for the Palace.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Farage calls for ‘tech answer' to protecting children online
Nigel Farage has called for a 'tech answer' to protecting children online, but said neither he nor the Government have the solution. The Reform UK leader was this week accused by a Cabinet minister of being on the side of 'people like Jimmy Savile' over the party's pledge to scrap the Online Safety Act. Speaking on LBC, Mr Farage described the comments, made by Technology Secretary Peter Kyle, as 'absolutely appalling'. During the phone-in, the Clacton MP took questions about his opposition to the Online Safety Act and new Government demands that social media companies tackle illegal content and activity online, along with content that is harmful to children. George Nicolaou, from Cheshunt in Hertfordshire, said his 15-year-old son Christoforos was 'murdered by predators to an attack propagated through social medias three years ago'. He described the law as a 'matter of life and death' for some families. Mr Farage replied: 'If age verification of itself was able to prevent incidents and tragedies like this, I would, George, 100% support it. 'But the problem is it doesn't, because of the VPN route.' VPNs or virtual private networks can enable internet users to circumvent the new rules, by masking a user's digital identity. 'There has to be a tech answer around this,' Mr Farage added. 'I don't know what it is, certainly the Government doesn't know what it is, but there has to be a tech answer of some kind, and we need to try and find it.' Mr Farage also said: 'We're talking about, how do we protect young people? 'How do we stop them accessing dangerous, violent content, or worse? 'I'll tell you what, George, here's the real danger – that if you go through a VPN, you can then access content on what's called the dark web, which is even worse than what you can find online now.' Mr Kyle told Sky News earlier this week: 'I see that Nigel Farage is already saying that he's going to overturn these laws. 'So you know, we have people out there who are extreme pornographers, peddling hate, peddling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side. 'Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he'd be perpetrating his crimes online. And Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side.' Mr Farage said: 'Most 13-year-olds are more tech savvy than Peter Kyle and the people that drew up this legislation didn't know what they were doing. 'We have to have a fresh look.' The Reform UK leader alleged the Government was 'setting up an elite police force to monitor what people say about illegal immigration and migrant hotels'. He added: 'This legislation is the biggest threat to free, open debate and speech we've ever seen.'
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Ministers ‘believe' Palestine recognition is compliant with international law
The Government 'believe' the plan to recognise a Palestinian state is compliant with international law, a minister has said. Business minister Gareth Thomas described the decision as a 'political judgment' after a group of peers warned it could be in contravention of international law. Some 38 members of the House of Lords, including some of the UK's most eminent lawyers, have written to Attorney General Lord Hermer about the Prime Minister's announcement. As first reported by the Times newspaper, the peers warned Sir Keir Starmer's pledge to recognise Palestine may breach international law as the territory may not meet the criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933. Asked whether recognising Palestine is compliant with international law, Mr Thomas told Times Radio: 'Yes, we believe it is. 'In the end, recognition of another state is a political judgment and over 140 countries have already recognised Palestine, and we're determined to do so in September if Israel does not end the violence in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and agree to a lasting route towards a two-state solution, and to no annexation in the West Bank.' In their letter to Lord Hermer, the peers said Palestine 'does not meet the international law criteria for recognition of a state, namely, defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states'. There is no certainty over the borders of Palestine, they said, and no single government as Hamas and Fatah are enemies. Mr Thomas told Times Radio there is a 'clear population' in Palestine and 'we have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders'. In their letter, seen by the PA news agency, the peers added: 'You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience. 'Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the Government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law.' Lord Hermer has previously insisted a commitment to international law 'goes absolutely to the heart' of the Government's approach to foreign policy. Among the respected lawyers to have signed the letter are Lord Pannick – who represented the previous government at the Supreme Court over its Rwanda scheme – as well as KCs Lord Verdirame and Lord Faulks. Sir Keir announced earlier this week that the UK could take the step of recognising Palestine in September ahead of a gathering at the UN. The UK will only refrain from doing so if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two month, the PM said.
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
What does recognising Palestine as a state actually mean?
The UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and a two-state solution in Gaza, Sir Keir Starmer has vowed. The prime minister said Benjamin Netanyahu's government must end its starvation tactics and allow the supply of aid into the embattled enclave after a UN-backed food security body said the 'worst-case scenario of famine' was playing out in the territory. The announcement on Tuesday came after an emergency virtual cabinet meeting where Sir Keir laid out his plan for peace in the Middle East, agreed over the weekend with French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Friedrich Merz. Sir Keir has come under mounting pressure from his own party to recognise a Palestinian state, which has only grown since Mr Macron announced France's intention to do so by September. In addition, Britain's foreign secretary David Lammy is attending a United Nations conference in New York on Tuesday to urge support for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Here, The Independent asks experts about what the UK recognising Palestinian statehood would mean in practice. What would UK recognition of Palestine as a state mean? Dr Julie Norman, an associate professor at UCL specialising in Middle Eastern politics, said it looks likely that the UK will recognise Palestine as a state, which would mean voting for this at the United Nations – but it would be unlikely the UN would be able to recognise Palestinian statehood due to the probability of the United States blocking the move. However, she said countries such as the UK and France voting for recognition at the UN would be a 'significant' move. And she said the UK officially recognising Palestinian statehood would still be of 'value', even if the reality is that not much would change on the ground, with Israel still 'fully rejecting' the prospect of recognition. Speaking of British recognition, Dr Norman said: 'It would be a strong moral commitment and stance to Palestine at a moment when it's never been more fraught in Gaza and the West Bank. 'In the short term, it's a diplomatic stance, and it makes room for policy changes. 'And, if and when parties come back to discuss the long-term conflict, it would put Palestine in a better position. So it wouldn't change things immediately, but I would say it still has value.' She added that the move might initially see more change in London than in Ramallah, a city in the central West Bank, which serves as the administrative capital of Palestine – with, for example, the opening of an embassy in the UK capital. This would not mean recognition of Hamas. What is the two-state solution? The idea of dividing the Holy Land goes back decades. When the British mandate over Palestine ended, the UN partition plan in 1947 envisioned dividing the territory into Jewish and Arab states. Upon Israel's declaration of independence the following year, war erupted with its Arab neighbours and the plan was never implemented. Over half of the Palestinian population fled or were forced to flee. Under a 1949 armistice, Jordan held control over the West Bank and east Jerusalem and Egypt over Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 six-day war. The Palestinians seek these lands for a future independent state, and the idea of a two-state solution based on Israel's pre-1967 boundaries has been the basis of peace talks dating back to the 1990s. The two-state solution has wide international support, but there is disagreement about how it would be implemented. Israel's creation and expansion of settlements in the Occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, are seen as a major obstacle to this. What would recognition of Palestine as a state mean for refugees? Sir Vincent Fean, a former British consul general to Jerusalem and now a trustee of the charity Britain Palestine Project, explained that recognition of Palestine as a state would mean that if Palestinian passports were issued, they would subsequently be recognised by the UK as passports of a state. However, Sir Vincent said Palestinian statehood would not affect the UK's refugee system. 'Does it impact the tally of refugees coming to the UK? No,' he said. This is because he expects the visa regime the UK currently has with Palestine – where travel is only allowed between the two after a successful visa application – would continue. He added that Palestinian statehood 'wouldn't particularly change the right of return for Palestinians to their homeland'. He said this was a 'long-standing right', although it would require negotiation with Israel. What does UK recognition of Palestinian statehood mean for how the two would communicate? Sir Vincent said this was a 'very important point' to clarify, as he highlighted the distinction between recognising the entity of Palestine and recognising factions of government. He said: 'It's important to say the British government doesn't recognise governments, it recognises states. 'So it isn't actually recognising President [Mahmoud] Abbas as head of the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organisation] and head of the Palestinian Authority. 'In practice, he would be the interlocutor in Ramallah, because there isn't an alternative.' He stressed, however, that Britain has already proscribed Hamas as a terrorist group and that this would not change. Dr Norman added that the Palestinian Authority is currently the main governing entity for Palestinians in the West Bank, which the UK has recognised and had lines of communication with for a long time. If Britain were to recognise Palestinian statehood, this would not change and would continue. Sir Vincent also said that the prospect of Hamas running Palestine next is 'practically zero' because the militants' chances of winning an election are 'remote'. He said the plan for the future governance of Gaza involving the Palestinian Authority will be a focus of the UN meeting being held this week. What countries have recognised Palestinian statehood? France has become the latest country to announce it will recognise Palestinian statehood, drawing angry rebukes from Israel and the United States and opening the door for other major nations to perhaps follow suit. Mr Macron last week published a letter sent to Mr Abbas confirming France's intention to press ahead with recognition and work to convince other partners to do the same. He said he would make a formal announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next month. France is now the first major Western power to shift its diplomatic stance on a Palestinian state, after Spain, Ireland, and Norway officially recognised it last year. The three countries made the declaration and agreed its borders would be demarcated as they were before the 1967 war, when Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. However, they also recognised that those borders may change if a final settlement is reached over the territory, and that their decisions did not diminish their belief in Israel's fundamental right to exist in peace and security. About 144 of the 193 UN member states recognise Palestine as a state, including most of the global South as well as Russia, China and India. But only a handful of the 27 European Union members do so, mostly former communist countries as well as Sweden and Cyprus. The UN General Assembly approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine in November 2012 by upgrading its observer status at the world body to 'non-member state' from 'entity'. What implications would UK recognition of Palestinian statehood have internationally? Dr Norman said: 'This is where it can be important'. Two major global powers, such as the UK and France, making the move would be 'significant' and would pave the way for conversations on the issue happening elsewhere, such as in Canada, she said. 'It starts isolating the US as the main major power backing Israel to the exclusion of Palestine,' she said. 'It makes them the exception and shows the rest of the world somewhat united in Palestinian self-determination, which has been the UK's policy for a while now. If we're serious about that, then we need to be serious about that. 'We don't have as much military weight as the US, but we do still have diplomatic weight, and we should use what we can. 'It would show Europe is committed to a two-state solution, and wouldn't let that disappear or sit in the back seat.'
