UK: what did Trump's visit achieve?
US President Donald Trump has ended his state visit to the UK with the signing of a multi-billion-dollar trade agreement. The deal will involve mutual investments of around 300 billion euros, Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced at a joint press conference on Thursday. Trump had also been received with much pomp by King Charles III at Windsor Castle on the first day of his visit. Commentators take stock.
The pomp paid off
Trump's visit was a success also because Britain pulled out all the stops, says The Times:
“The carriages, the scarlet, the bearskins, the massed bands, the pipes, the Red Arrows, the hand-polished cutlery: all had been worthwhile. President Trump's mother, Mary Anne MacLeod, a daughter of the Hebrides and staunch royalist, would have been proud. Not one but two state visits. Who would have thought it? Mr Trump would. A man who understands the selling power of the arresting image, the president was not going to miss out on the mother of all photo opportunities. ... Sir Keir, desperate to placate Mr Trump and reduce the pain his tariffs might inflict on British exporters, was happy to oblige.”
On the same wavelength
Starmer just seems to get on well with Trump, interjects Corriere della Sera:
“The White House occupant brought along the American business elite - from Microsoft to BlackRock, Google and Apple - and a technology partnership was forged which aims to put the United States and the UK side by side at the forefront of the global artificial intelligence revolution. ... As Starmer said, the 'special relationship' between the two countries, which already exists in security and trade, will now be enriched by a new technological pillar. ... So for the British Prime Minister, this visit was certainly a success, confirming his role as the person closest to Trump both intellectually and emotionally.”
The king as chief diplomat
Prime Minister Starmer's approach of involving Charles III in Trump's visit was successful, Corriere della Sera nods:
“Rarely has the monarchy been deployed for such a political role. Yesterday King Charles fully performed his duties as 'chief diplomat'. It was a delicate task given that it involved appeasing someone as unpredictable as Donald Trump. But the monarch succeeded admirably, judging by the laughter and jokes exchanged with the president, who never tired of repeating 'thank you, thank you'. It's always said that the British royals keep out of politics, but Prime Minister Keir Starmer decided to play that card. ... And after some initial grumbling, King Charles played along with enthusiasm.”
Vanity fair
Trump was allowed to live out his childlike dream of power during his visit to London, observes Visão:
“Being received by Charles III at Windsor Castle is a true paradise for the American president who is so fond of the golden salons, the pomp of the royal carriage, the horses of the royal regiments and various branches of the armed forces marching in step. Protest are being staged outside – in Windsor as in London – but none of this worries Trump. ... It was Donald Trump's dream come true. That's understandable. He's like a child at a vanity fair.”
Starmer must bite the bullet
Trump's state visit is not a cause for jubilation but it is sorely needed, says The Guardian:
“Many will recoil from the engagement with Trump. Those of us who are not government ministers or diplomats have the luxury of being able to do so. That's not an option for Starmer. Since it is in the national interest to try to influence Trump, it is part of Starmer's duty to try. He clearly accepts that it is part of his job. He is right. ... There are, of course, multiple reasons why Trump's state visit can and should be criticised. The principal reason is that Trump is doing harm – a lot of it. So his visit is not an occasion for celebration but for damage limitation.”
Already too dependent on the US
It is not in the UK's interest to cosy up to Trump, warns The Spectator:
“The 'special relationship' is not a relationship of equals. It is already shading into dependence, especially in the economy and in technology. If Britain is to preserve any sovereignty in this new age of rivalry, it needs to recognise the asymmetry. The scale of that dependence is striking. The United States now owns about a third of all foreign direct investment stock in the UK ... For too long, British politicians have spoken of it as if it were a family tie, immune to the logic of power. But America is a great power, not a benevolent cousin. It pursues its interests, and those interests do not always coincide with ours.”
Overshadowed by the Epstein scandal
One topic had to be avoided at all costs, Corriere del Ticino puts in:
“King Charles III described the summary dismissal of the British ambassador to Washington, Lord Mandelson, shortly before Trump's visit as an 'unwelcome disturbance'. Mandelson was dismissed because of his close friendship with paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Close, but never as close as that between Epstein and the US president, who was welcomed by the king with full honours. ... The monarch had to pretend he had forgotten this, but the demonstrators who projected a photo of Trump and Epstein onto the walls of Windsor Castle upon Trump's arrival gave him a stark reminder. ... The spectre of Epstein has already caused serious damage to the House of Windsor: Prince Andrew has been accused of sexual assault by one of the victims, Virginia Giuffré.”