'It's all about symbolism': The tight-lipped Royal Family is sending a message with its trip to Canada
OTTAWA — As an institution that has for centuries employed symbolism with surgical precision, the timing of the King's visit to Canada may be more revealing than the itinerary itself.
It's considered a core principle of the British constitutional monarchy that the ceremonial head of state of the United Kingdom, Canada and other Commonwealth countries not comment on or become directly involved in politics. It's also a key component in trying to maintain the public's trust.
So symbols often substitute in the Royal Family's world where words are absent and could be considered to be on the wrong side of a delicate balancing act. When reliable Commonwealth loyalist Canada came under economic and political attack in recent months from U.S. President Donald Trump, for example, King Charles III stayed quiet.
Instead, he and Queen Camilla sent symbolic support across the Atlantic, planting a red maple tree at Buckingham Palace.
But the King and Queen are sending a clear message in support of Canadian sovereignty, said Thomas Morin-Cabana, the national chairman of The Crown Society of Canada. Earlier this year, Trump had made repeated references to annexing Canada and often called former prime minister Justin Trudeau the governor of the 51st American state.
'It's all about symbolism,' said Morin-Cabana.
Prime Minister Mark Carney indicated as much when earlier this month he announced the monarch's visit, with a clear nod to the Trump threats.
'This is an historic honour that matches the weight of our time,' he told reporters during his first press conference after the election.
The Royal couple's two-day visit to Canada this week is their first since Charles assumed the throne following the death of his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, in September 2022. The visit will also mark the first time that a monarch has read the speech from the throne in the Canadian Parliament, instead of the Governor General, since 1977.
The speech, which normally lays out the government's broad goals, will be delivered at a delicate time in Canada. The country faces a housing crisis and a teetering medical system, while the economy is threatened by ballooning government debt, sluggish growth and ongoing tariff threats from the south. Carney has said that Canadians shouldn't expect things with the U.S. to return to how they used to be any time soon.
André Lecours, a political science professor at the University of Ottawa, said the timing of the visit is good for Canada because it sends a message of unity following the Trump threats.
'If you mess with us, you're almost messing with the Crown.'
But the Crown is also conscious of Britain's national interests too. The U.K., like most countries, has also been involved in tariff disputes with Trump and reached a deal of sorts with the U.S. earlier this month. When British Prime Minister Keir Starmer met Trump in Washington, he quite deliberately produced a written invitation from King Charles to Trump, a known Royal admirer, for a state visit at Buckingham Palace.
'This is very special. This is unprecedented,' Starmer flattered Trump, as he placed a hand on the U.S. president's right shoulder. 'I think that symbolizes the strength of the relationship between us.'
While the Crown's approach to recent Canada-U.S. relations may be nuanced, Canadians also have mixed views on the role of the monarch in a modern democracy and of the monarch himself.
According to a poll conducted earlier this month, Canadians' opinions are evenly split on the monarchy and King Charles.
The poll, conducted May 16-18 by Montreal-based Léger for the Association for Canadian Studies, found that 50 per cent of Canadians have a 'very positive' or 'somewhat positive' view of the monarchy. Atlantic Canadians (57 per cent) expressed the most positive view, while Quebecers (37 per cent) were the least positive.
The poll surveyed 1,537 Canadians and has a margin of error of 2.5 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
The poll found that Canadians' views of King Charles were similarly divided, with 48 per cent of respondents expressing an either 'very' or 'somewhat positive' view, and 52 per cent saying that they had a negative view. The monarch's highest ratings were in Manitoba-Saskatchewan (57 per cent), the poll found, and the lowest in Quebec (39 per cent).
Jack Jedwab, the association's president and chief executive officer, said the numbers show that Canadians are sharply split in their views of the monarchy and King Charles. 'There's no consensus.'
National Post
Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what's really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GOP Senator Says Trump's Military Parade Reminds Him Of North Korea
WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump's upcoming military parade featuring dozens of tanks and other armed vehicles in the nation's capital this week isn't sitting well with some members of his party on Capitol Hill. Asked about the June 14 event, which will cost taxpayers up to $45 million and will commemorate the Army's 250th anniversary, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) expressed concerns about its cost and the imagery typically associated with authoritarian regimes in the former Soviet Union and North Korea. 'I love parades but I'm not really excited about $40 million for a parade,' Paul told HuffPost. 'I don't really think the symbolism of tanks and missiles is really what we're all about.' 'If you ask me about a military parade, all the images that come to mind, the first images, are of the Soviet Union and North Korea,' he added. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also said he would spend the money on other things. 'The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history,' Kennedy told Fox News. 'We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion. Everybody else in the jungle knows, and we're a lion. I would save the money, but if the president wants to have a parade, he's the President, and I'm not.' The Saturday parade — which happens to fall on the president's birthday ― will feature a massive amount of military equipment and thousands of soldiers in Washington, D.C. It comes amid nationwide protests against Trump's immigration crackdowns and his decision to deploy military troops to help quell unrest in Los Angeles. Trump on Tuesday threatened anyone planning to protest the parade, even though U.S. citizens have a constitutional right to peacefully assemble. 'If there's any protest that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force, by the way. And for those people that want to protest, they're gonna be met with very big force,' the president said from the Oval Office. Millions of people are expected to take part in 'No Kings' protests in more than 1,500 cities across the country on Saturday, organizers of the demonstrations have said. The effort is focused on pushing back against Trump's attacks on the rule of law. However, no 'No Kings' protests are planned for Washington, D.C., where the parade is being held. 'In America, we don't do kings,' reads a website for the demonstrations. 'They've defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services. The corruption has gone too. far.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies
U.S. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attend an event in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit - Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images On May 11, 2023, President Joseph Biden ended the COVID-19 public health emergency, calling an finish to the pandemic. By the end of 2023, COVID-19 claimed the lives of over 20 million people around the world. But through international cooperation and evidence-based science, vaccines were developed and the world moved on. Indeed, perhaps the biggest success of the period was the quick production of a COVID-19 vaccine. The research behind the mRNA vaccine had been ongoing since the 1970s, but the emergency of the pandemic and international sharing of knowledge helped bring the vaccine to fruition. Today, the COVID-19 vaccine has been credited with saving 2.4 million lives around the world. But now, the U.S. is choosing competition over cooperation. With President Donald Trump's day one executive order to leave the World Health Organization (WHO)—blaming their COVID-19 response—and the shuttering of USAID, the country is taking steps towards further dividing health efforts across the globe. Here in the U.S., a sudden end to $11.4 billion of covid-related grants is stifling national pandemic preparedness efforts on the local and state levels. And most recently, Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. purged experts from the CDC Advisory Committee, putting lives at risk. Historical lessons demonstrate the need for global health infrastructure that works together, shares knowledge, and remembers that pathogens do not stop at borders. White House's Pandemic Office, Busy With Bird Flu, May Shrink Under Trump One of the greatest global health achievements of all time—smallpox eradication—provides a perfect example of what can be done with independent scientific research and international cooperation. During the Cold War between the U.S. and USSR, decades of tension brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Yet, incredibly, the nations managed to find common ground to support the efforts of smallpox eradication. Indeed, they understood the strategic benefits that came from letting public health practitioners and scientists work outside of political divides. The WHO was founded after World War II in 1948. Its formation marked a move from international health, that focused on nations, to global health, that would serve humanity first. The WHO's first eradication effort was the failed, U.S.-backed, Malaria Eradication Program from 1955 to 1969. The Smallpox Eradication Program, with intensive efforts beginning in 1967, provided a chance for redemption for the U.S. and WHO. For the United States, investing in disease eradication and poverty helped to mitigate growing backlash against the Vietnam War. In June of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, 'I propose to dedicate this year to finding new techniques for making man's knowledge serve man's welfare.' He called for 1965—the same year he ordered ground troops to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism —to be a year of international cooperation that could bypass the politics of the Cold War. Previously, the USSR did not participate in the U.S. and WHO's first, failed global eradication plan for malaria. But upon rejoining the WHO in 1956, it was the Soviets who made the first call and investment into global eradication of smallpox in 1958. The WHO functioning as a mediator was crucial to allowing the USSR and the U.S. to work together. It allowed both nations to avoid giving credit to each other; rather success went to science itself. President Johnson called this 'a turning point' away from 'man against man' towards 'man against nature.' The limited role of politicians in the program proved to be key to its success. Scientists made decisions and worked together—no matter what country they came from—by focusing on disease and vaccination, not international tensions. The Soviet-initiated program was lead by Donald A. Henderson, a U.S. epidemiologist, who worked alongside the Russians until the last case of smallpox occurred in Somalia on October 26, 1977. During the 20th century, smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 to 500 million deaths. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated by the WHO in October 1980, and is today still the only human disease to achieve this distinction. Less than a year after the declaration of smallpox eradication, the emergence of another pandemic, the HIV/AIDS crisis, reinforced the importance of science-first cooperation over politically-driven decision making. In June 1981, the first cases of a new unknown disease were reported in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In short order, gay men were stigmatized and blamed in what would become one of the biggest public health disasters of all time. It took years of grassroots science-based activism to move beyond HIV/AIDS victim-blaming and find medical solutions. The Poster Child for AIDS Obscured as Much About the Crisis as He Revealed Too often, governments across the globe placed blame on the gay community for their 'sins' and did not provide needed support, leaving the sick to suffer and die. The pharmaceutical companies profited from the limited medications they had available and did not pursue sufficient development. The FDA process for new drugs was scheduled to take nine years, at a time when life expectancy after receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis was one year. These issues sparked activism, spawning the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) in 1987. ACT UP organizers took science into their own hands and began educating themselves. Members began reading scientific journals religiously, learning the chemistry and epidemiology of drug manufacturing and clinical trials. Members learned how to translate these dense scientific messages to educate the community members on what was—and what was not—being done to help. Because of this work, the FDA changed policies to allow for new treatments to be tested at accelerated rates in times of emergency. ACT UP was able to shift the cultural blame showing that the issue was a result of politics getting in the way of scientific advancements. By 1990, ACT UP influenced the largest federal HIV program to pass Congress, the Ryan White CARE Act. This program was a vital precursor to the 2003 PEPFAR (The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) global initiative. Both of these histories offer a powerful lesson: global health is national health, and national health is local health. With the recent funding cuts from the U.S. government, the future of global health is going in an unknown direction. And yet, the occurrence of pandemics is expected to increase in frequency due to climate change, mass migration, urbanization, and ecosystem destruction. It has been estimated that there is about a 25% chance we will have another COVID-sized pandemic within the next 10 years. No matter how secure the world makes borders, history shows that it can not protect us from disease if we do not have a strong, interconnected public health infrastructure. Luke Jorgensen is a Master of Public Health student at Purdue University where his epidemiology research examines human migration and infectious disease. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump White House Begins Paving Over Rose Garden 5 Years After Melania's Controversial Redesign
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump began their latest White House renovation on June 9, which involves paving over the Rose Garden lawn. The garden area is used to host press conferences, dignitaries, sports teams and special events, and the president has explained that the soft ground can cause people to fall. The president has also promised to self-fund the addition of two massive flagpoles, one on each side of the White Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump began their latest White House renovations on Monday, June 9, as workers broke ground to begin paving over parts of the historic Rose Garden. Photos of the initial construction show a grassy area being dug up and parts of a limestone border — installed by Melania during her husband's first term in office — being moved so that workers can lay down a concrete surface within the border. In a March interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham, Trump explained his reasoning for turning the grass lawn into something of a presidential patio in the style of Mar-a-Lago. 'You know, we use [the Rose Garden] for press conferences, and it doesn't work because the people fall,' he said. The terrain can be wet, and the soft ground can be an issue for some, Trump added. "Women, with the high heels, it just didn't work.' A White House official described the new construction as a "restoration" and assured PEOPLE that the first couple "have deep respect for the history of the White House and for the Rose Garden." "This restoration to the Rose Garden preserves the beauty of the space and builds on the work done in 2020," the official said, "with a focus on enhancing practical use and guest experience for those attending special events.' In addition to paving over the grass, the project reportedly includes audio and visual upgrades, as well as the installation of two new flag poles on the North and South Lawns. The updates — which are being completed by the National Park Service and funded by the Trust for the National Mall — are expected to be finished by mid-August 2025. Melania faced significant backlash when she initially redid the Rose Garden in 2020. The first lady even made a rare public statement after NBC News presidential historian Michael Beschloss described her botanical vision as 'grim.' "Evisceration of White House Rose Garden was completed a year ago this month, and here was the grim result—decades of American history made to disappear," Beschloss said in 2021, referencing the limestone border Melania laid down in the outdoor space, which often hosts speeches and receptions for visiting dignitaries, sports teams and more. Melania's office fired back at Beschloss on X, sharing a different photo that showed the garden was in full bloom. ".@BeschlossDC has proven his ignorance by showing a picture of the Rose Garden in its infancy. The Rose Garden is graced with a healthy & colorful blossoming of roses," they wrote at the time. "His misleading information is dishonorable & he should never be trusted as a professional historian." Amid news of the latest changes to the garden, a White House official explained to PEOPLE that the 2020 renovation was an attempt to restore the Rose Garden to the design envisioned by Bunny Mellon, who redesigned the outdoor space in 1961 at the request of President John F. Kennedy. The ensuing years have seen the roses fail to thrive — only 12 bushes remained when Melania added over 200. The 2020 work also aimed to improve drainage and increase the amount of sunlight each plant received. Trump announced in April that he would be personally funding the addition of two 'beautiful' 100-foot flagpoles — one on the North Lawn and one on the South Lawn. 'They've needed flagpoles for 200 years,' he told reporters at the time, despite that the American flag and POW/MIA flag fly atop the White House on a flagpole each day. Read the original article on People
