MAGA v the monarch: Is King Charles blowing royal raspberries at Trump?
But venture he did. And, not for the first time since Trump's restoration, he seemed happy to become the leading man in an intricately choreographed act of geopolitical theatre directed against the White House.
Loading
In Ottawa he essentially reprised the role he played on the weekend after the Ukrainian president got roughed up in the Oval Office by Trump and his vice-presidential henchman J.D. Vance. Then he welcomed a bruised Volodymyr Zelensky to Sandringham, his East Anglian estate. Arranged at warp speed, that meeting was also rapid royal rebuttal. A very British middle finger.
The government of Keir Starmer also knows how to play the royal card, using it both to charm Trump and to chide him. Trump, whose mother was born in the Western Isles of Scotland, is an arch monarchist who idolised Queen Elizabeth II and does not seem particularly perturbed that Charles is the most 'woke' monarch ever to occupy the British throne.
The simple fact that Charles comes with the title 'His Royal Highness' and enjoys the kind of dynastic privilege money cannot buy, gives him a form of diplomatic immunity. No matter that Charles is gently mocked by family members, I am told, for being to the left of George Monbiot, one of The Guardian's most progressive columnists.
So Trump, who is so easily flattered, instantly took the bait when Prime Minister Starmer, in full reality-TV mode, pulled out an envelope during an Oval Office fireside chat in February that contained a personal invitation from the King for an unprecedented second UK state visit.
Since then Starmer has been at the forefront of the European rearguard to protect Ukraine from both President Putin's warmongering and President Trump's supine peacemaking. Yet despite Starmer playing a double diplomatic game, the promise of that presidential visit to Britain seems to have kept him in Trump's good graces.
Proof came in the form of a new trade deal with the United States earlier this month, the first negotiated by an international leader since 'Liberation Day'. What of 'Independence Day', I hear you bellow. Why is Trump being allowed by his party, the Republicans, to act like a monarch? This is not so historically perverse as it seems.
The American revolution, after all, was primarily a rebellion against the British parliament rather than the British king. The complaint of some leading revolutionaries was that after the Glorious Revolution in the late 17th century the British parliament had usurped too many monarchical prerogatives, and that King George should have overruled Westminster in managing his insurgent North American colonies. In 1776 it was possible to be both a revolutionary and a royalist. Alexander Hamilton, despite the myth-making of the brilliant Broadway musical, fitted this description.
After the Americans triumphed over the British, this strand of thinking shaped the new US Constitution, and in particular its creation of a strong executive branch. An irony of the War of Independence is that the United States ended up with a new head of state with more powers than the deposed king. The titles under consideration for what eventually became known as the presidency reflected this kingly bent: 'His Elective Highness', 'His Supremacy', 'His Mightiness', 'His Magistracy' and, yes, 'His Majesty'.
As for Britain's current monarch, Trump's subversion of America's postwar alliance system means he now stands at the head of a revitalised Commonwealth of Nations, a friendlier pact altogether.
Loading
Trump's antagonistic relationship with Europe has also enabled Starmer to reset relations with the European Union, sealed earlier this month with the renegotiation of the Brexit deal, and become a more weighty global player.
Perhaps Trump has helped Britain, after losing its empire, finally find a role: to use the soft power of the monarchy, its one-time figurehead of imperialism, to thwart the territorial expansionism of its former colony. It's a joust for the ages. The monarch against MAGA. King Charles against King Donald.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


West Australian
an hour ago
- West Australian
'Unjustified': PM-Trump talks push after tariff hike
Pressure is again mounting for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to personally meet with Donald Trump amid fresh alarm over the US president's "unjustified" tariff hike on steel imports. Mr Trump on Saturday announced plans to increase tariffs on foreign imports of steel from 25 to 50 per cent to "further secure the steel industry in the United States". The latest decision could impact Australia's industry, which exported more than $414 million worth of iron and steel to the US in 2024. Trade Minister Don Farrell says the tariffs are unjustified and not the act of a friend. "They are an act of economic self-harm that will only hurt consumers and businesses who rely on free and fair trade," Mr Farrell said on Saturday. "We will continue to engage and advocate strongly for the removal of the tariffs." Opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan said the latest move was concerning for Australian jobs and the coalition expected the US to honour its obligations under both nations' free trade agreement. "The Albanese government needs to double its efforts to protect our steel industry and local jobs for our steel workers," he said in a statement. "This is why it is imperative that the Australian prime minister personally meets with President Trump ... to develop a personal rapport with the United States president and protect Australian industries." The US imported 289 product categories in 2024, costing $US147 billion ($A229 billion), with nearly two-thirds of those aluminium and one-third steel, according to Census Bureau data from the US International Trade Commission. The 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium were among the earliest implemented following Mr Trump's return to the White House in January and came into effect in March. Australia will continue to push for Mr Trump to drop his tariffs after a US federal court blocked his Liberation Day taxes on imported goods from going into effect. Goods from Australia are subject to a 10 per cent baseline tariff, while all steel and aluminium imports to the US face 25 per cent tariffs before Mr Trump's latest announcement. The New York-based Court of International Trade found the US president had overstepped his authority by imposing the tariffs. The administration launched an appeal, decrying "unelected judges" should not decide how to address a "national emergency". Labor has sought to temper expectations on whether it can land a deal with the US to remove the tariffs.


Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
'Unjustified': PM-Trump talks push after tariff hike
Pressure is again mounting for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to personally meet with Donald Trump amid fresh alarm over the US president's "unjustified" tariff hike on steel imports. Mr Trump on Saturday announced plans to increase tariffs on foreign imports of steel from 25 to 50 per cent to "further secure the steel industry in the United States". The latest decision could impact Australia's industry, which exported more than $414 million worth of iron and steel to the US in 2024. Trade Minister Don Farrell says the tariffs are unjustified and not the act of a friend. "They are an act of economic self-harm that will only hurt consumers and businesses who rely on free and fair trade," Mr Farrell said on Saturday. "We will continue to engage and advocate strongly for the removal of the tariffs." Opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan said the latest move was concerning for Australian jobs and the coalition expected the US to honour its obligations under both nations' free trade agreement. "The Albanese government needs to double its efforts to protect our steel industry and local jobs for our steel workers," he said in a statement. "This is why it is imperative that the Australian prime minister personally meets with President Trump ... to develop a personal rapport with the United States president and protect Australian industries." The US imported 289 product categories in 2024, costing $US147 billion ($A229 billion), with nearly two-thirds of those aluminium and one-third steel, according to Census Bureau data from the US International Trade Commission. The 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium were among the earliest implemented following Mr Trump's return to the White House in January and came into effect in March. Australia will continue to push for Mr Trump to drop his tariffs after a US federal court blocked his Liberation Day taxes on imported goods from going into effect. Goods from Australia are subject to a 10 per cent baseline tariff, while all steel and aluminium imports to the US face 25 per cent tariffs before Mr Trump's latest announcement. The New York-based Court of International Trade found the US president had overstepped his authority by imposing the tariffs. The administration launched an appeal, decrying "unelected judges" should not decide how to address a "national emergency". Labor has sought to temper expectations on whether it can land a deal with the US to remove the tariffs.


Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
US court won't lift block on Trump's govt overhaul
A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday by the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals means that, for now, the Trump administration cannot proceed with plans to shed tens of thousands of federal jobs and shutter many government offices and programs. US District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco on May 22 blocked large-scale layoffs at about 20 federal agencies, agreeing with a group of unions, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday denied the Trump administration's bid to stay Illston's decision pending an appeal, which could take months to resolve. The administration will likely now ask the US Supreme Court to pause the ruling. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "The Ninth Circuit's decision today rightfully maintains the block on the Trump-Vance administration's unlawful, disruptive, and destructive reorganisation of the federal government," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The court said the administration had not provided any evidence it would suffer an irreparable injury if the lower court order remained in place and said plaintiffs were likely to prevail. "The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution," said the majority opinion from Judge William Fletcher, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton. He was joined by Judge Lucy Koh, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden. Illston's ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul that was spearheaded by Trump ally Elon Musk, the world's richest person and CEO of electric vehicle maker Tesla. Along with blocking layoffs, Illston barred the Department of Government Efficiency from ordering job cuts or reorganisation at federal agencies. Dozens of lawsuits have challenged DOGE's work on various grounds, including claims that it violated labour and privacy laws and exceeded its authority, with mixed results. Two judges had separately ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of probationary employees, who are typically newer hires and were fired en masse in February, but appeals courts paused those rulings.