During President Trump’s recent state visit to Britain, King Charles III subtly referenced his ancestor George III, noting that the 18th-century monarch didn’t hold back his opinions on “revolutionary leaders” in the colonies. It’s safe to assume, however, that both King Charles and Prime Minister Keir Starmer chose their words far more carefully with Mr. Trump.
This visit, largely designed to shower the president with flattering pageantry rather than achieve significant policy breakthroughs, might have had King Charles thinking of George III’s famous line from “Hamilton”: “You’ll be back.” For Mr. Trump, the grand spectacle in Britain served as an enchanting escape from a United States grappling with the fallout from Charlie Kirk’s tragic death. The royal treatment offered a powerful sense of validation to an imperial-minded president, placing him among royalty in a nation where he boasts ancestral ties.
Indeed, this marked Mr. Trump’s return state visit to Britain—a singular honor that he humorously suggested shouldn’t happen again. The elaborate two-day display, featuring everything from gilded carriages and marching Grenadiers to breathtaking aerobatic jets and flag-draped parachutists, undeniably left the president deeply pleased.
A striking photograph shows a skydiver, with a giant American flag trailing behind, descending against a cloudy sky above Chequers, the British prime minister’s country estate. This was one of the many spectacles arranged for the president during his visit.
What remained unclear, however, as Mr. Trump departed Prime Minister Starmer’s country residence at Chequers for Washington, was whether this unprecedented show of hospitality would yield any lasting advantages for Britain.
The president showed no sign of easing the terms of a trade deal Britain had been negotiating with the United States. Nor did he promise to exert any new pressure on two critical security issues for Britain: Russia’s ongoing conflict in Ukraine and Israel’s prolonged military actions in Gaza. While he expressed disagreement with Mr. Starmer regarding the recognition of a Palestinian state, his tone remained notably free of animosity. According to diplomats, avoiding contentious disputes and lavishing praise on the president have become the hallmarks of a successful Trump visit. Kim Darroch, who served as Britain’s ambassador to Washington during Mr. Trump’s first term, noted, ‘We could still get into a lot of trouble with Trump, despite having done all this. But if we don’t, I’m confident ministers will say it was worth the price. That’s just the reality of being a medium-size country on the global stage.’
Mr. Starmer highlighted a new advanced technology partnership with the United States as the main business benefit of the visit. Addressing an audience of Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Street financiers, he enthusiastically promised that the agreement would unlock ‘life-changing investments across the United Kingdom.’ Mr. Trump, true to form, was more casual about the deal. He quipped that if it proved to be unfavorable for the United States, he would simply blame Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who had advised him to sign it. He even claimed ignorance of Peter Mandelson, Britain’s most recent ambassador to Washington and a key negotiator for the deal, despite having met him in the Oval Office just last week.
An image captures Mr. Trump and Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain seated facing each other in comfortable armchairs before a fireplace, flanked by bookshelves, at Chequers, near London.
This exchange arose during what could have been the most awkward moment of a joint news conference between Mr. Trump and Mr. Starmer. The president faced a question about whether he sympathized with Mr. Mandelson, whom Mr. Starmer had dismissed the previous week following fresh revelations about his close friendship with financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Mr. Trump, who often dodges questions about his own long-standing association with Epstein (spanning at least 15 years by his own admission), turned the question to Starmer with a slight smile, asking, ‘What is your answer to that?’ In a terse response, Mr. Starmer explained that he had taken action after ‘some information came to light last week, which wasn’t available when he was appointed.’ Given the potential for a far more confrontational exchange, this was a relatively mild interaction. It suggested that Mr. Trump was keen to avoid embarrassing his host, with whom he has cultivated a surprisingly cordial relationship despite their political differences.
A photograph shows heavy security measures at Chequers for the leaders’ meeting, including an officer on a rooftop with binoculars next to a sniper rifle.
Yet, Mr. Trump offered little to indicate that the US-Britain relationship was a reciprocal one. During a meeting with business leaders, his focus remained on the advantages American farmers stood to gain in the British market. British officials, meanwhile, failed to secure tariff reductions on steel exports or Scotch whisky, which were key objectives for their side. “We’re really the ones who can do tariffs,” Mr. Trump declared, as Mr. Starmer listened impassively. “No one else can do them.” Even the much-touted technology partnership drew criticism. Nick Clegg, a former Liberal Democratic deputy prime minister and later a lobbyist for Meta, derided the deal as ‘sloppy seconds’ from Silicon Valley. “It’s all one-way traffic,” Mr. Clegg stated in a speech to the Royal Television Society in Cambridge. “These companies need those infrastructure resources anyway. They’re building data centers all over the world. Maybe they were pushed a bit forward just to meet the timetable with this week’s state visit.” Conversely, British diplomats argued that a transatlantic agreement on civil nuclear technology held significant value, potentially giving Britain an advantage in the burgeoning market for small modular reactors. These compact, carbon-free power plants could be crucial in helping Britain meet its ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
On pressing security matters, Mr. Trump offered no fresh commitments of support to a ‘coalition of the willing’ that Mr. Starmer and other European leaders are forming to stabilize Ukraine post-peace settlement with Russia. Analysts suggested that any significant breakthrough on such complex issues was improbable during a state visit.
The article concludes with an image of Mr. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, ascending the stairs to board Air Force One at Stansted Airport, marking their departure from Britain.
Both Mr. Starmer and King Charles also found themselves observers to the perpetual drama that defines Mr. Trump’s presidency. Following the Wednesday banquet, the president retreated to his room in Windsor Castle to post on social media, proclaiming the suspension of talk-show host Jimmy Kimmel (after comments regarding reactions to Mr. Kirk’s killing) as ‘great news for America.’ The next day, with Labour Prime Minister Starmer standing beside him, Mr. Trump launched into repeated, scathing attacks on his Democratic predecessor, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. He also suggested that Mr. Starmer ought to consider deploying troops to curb the flow of migrants into Britain. Despite these provocations, Mr. Starmer, much like the King, remained composed. He consistently referred to Mr. Trump as his friend, illustrating that the flattery and diplomatic maneuvering are seemingly a worthwhile cost, even if they invite jest in Britain, as long as they keep Mr. Trump favorably disposed. Indeed, the lengths to which the British went might have prompted the president to echo King George III’s smug lyrics from ‘Hamilton’ back at his hosts: “You’ll be back, soon, you’ll see. You’ll remember you belong to me.”