An Honest British Rebuke

Peter Hitchens writes:

I think King Charles should rebel against our government’s decision to grovel to President Donald Trump. Sir Keir Starmer has ordered our poor, kind, gentle monarch to travel to the ridiculous court of that erratic American Ayatollah. He has done so in spite of Mr Trump repeatedly insulting Britain. He derides us in spite of already being indulged with an unprecedented second State visit to this country last September. And do not forget Sir Keir’s distressing, wasted attempts to be civil and rational during their meetings and phone calls.

This is surely enough evidence that flattering this strange man only encourages him to be unpleasant. The Orange President has said many frightful and ignorant things about us, but perhaps the worst was his sneer that British servicemen and women had held back from the front line in Afghanistan.

Our soldiers shrug off such jibes, especially from a man who made such an effort to avoid combat in Vietnam. But those of us (I am one of them) whose family members took part in that conflict, and who counted every long, slow day of danger, are a bit more sensitive.

My suggestion is that HM should softly command the captain of his aircraft to divert to loyal Canada, as late as possible in the flight. I am sure the Canadians, whose monarch Charles is, would love to have him for a relaxing and good-humoured few days, free of crass rudeness and safe from Oval Office ambushes of the kind Mr Trump likes so much.

The people of Canada jolly well ought to be in front of Mr Trump, in the queue for such visits. Canada exists mainly because thousands of loyal British subjects fled north after being driven from their homes in the 1780s. They were cruelly persecuted and hounded by fanatical republican radicals, who could not have come to power alone, but sought the aid of Britain’s main enemy, France. Why should a noisy, rude inheritor of the rebels get a royal visit before loyal Canada does?

Just imagine the sheer glory of it, as President Trump, standing grandly by the red carpet at the Andrews airbase outside Washington, is told: ‘The King of England isn’t coming. He’s gone to Ottawa instead.’

I’d guess that a growing number of Americans would much enjoy such a snub. Mr Trump presumably wants a royal visit to try to shore up his shrivelling popularity. As things stand, his party is likely to do very badly in midterm elections this autumn. If it does badly enough, that may finish him off. He will not just be a loud, noisily quacking lame duck. He will have to abandon his worrying dreams of wangling a third term in the gold-leaf encrusted White House he increasingly treats as if it is his own.

Surrounded by flatterers, he grows more absurd all the time. An honest British rebuke would be good for him.

A month ago, I asked here: ‘Who does he think he is? The late Kim Il Sung? Perhaps the next thing will be a 100ft gold-plated statue staring out over the Potomac river.’

I thought I was joking. But it is always unwise to joke about Mr Trump’s grandeur. Last week a film was released of his planned Presidential Library, a flashy skyscraper destined to adorn Miami when he finally retires. As far as I could see from the video, the ‘library’ will contain no actual books, though it will have a golden escalator, a Boeing 747 and lo!, a gold-plated statue of Mr Trump.

The posture of this work of art, its fist raised, is remarkably similar to that of the monster idol of the late Kim Il Sung, supreme leader of North Korea, before which his subjects must bow their heads.

Kim’s image used to be gold-covered, too. It was stripped back to bronze after the Chinese, who North Korea had been begging for money, complained about the extravagance.