I was hoping you'd address this issue and I think your analysis is spot on. No fault attaches to Charles (yet) but my God, it was nauseating to see Starmer behave in that cowardly, servile manner in front of Trump. "A second state visit! It's unprecedented! A first in history!" And to make it worse: "You're trying to find a divide between us that doesn't exist...we didn't discuss Canada." Jesus.
I fully understand he didn't want to poke Trump in the eye by mounting a furious defence of Canada, but he still could have said something along the lines of: "Canada is a long-standing member of the western alliance of democratic nations. We will never forget the price Canada has paid to support both Britain and the US in many, many military efforts both decades ago and more recently." It doesn't go far enough but it would have been something at least.
In the end...even Starmer knows he beclowned himself, and despite all that, there's no guarantee that his desperate performance will save the UK from Trump's crosshairs.
It’s not just Starmer, but the whole of the UK that’s the problem here. They’ve weakened themselves through Brexit, which makes them easy picking for the bully in the White House.
Even so, it’s an example of what one commentator calls the first rule of foreign relations: “Nations don’t have friends. They have interests.” The UK will only act to support Canada if and to the extent it is in their interest to do so.
As for the King, I agree 100% this is for the 2 governments to resolve. There’s a minor but instructive precedent in the effort to give Conrad Black his peerage. The offer was made by HM on behalf her UK government, only to be told no by her government in Canada. The palace told the 2 governments to work it out.
Starmer has proven disappointing on a number of fronts, this is just another failure. He’s a weak leader, it appears. Sorry for Britain. Hope it doesn’t affect us or Ukraine.
I agree with your analysis. Everyone is acting appropriately within the current system. But your post also points to a serious weakness in the system created by sharing a head of state with other countries.
It’s reasonable for Canadians to want a head of state to speak out in defense of national sovereignty. For the reasons you’ve explained, that’s not going to happen. Given the current threat to our sovereignty, that’s an issue.
Final point: If the shoe was on the other foot, and British sovereignty was being threatened, would the palace tell the British government that the King can’t say anything that might not be in line with the Canadian government’s interests?
Starmer is enjoying a honeymoon of a sorts with the current American administration. Good for him and his country. History shows it will be short and then he, and his country, will be in for whirlwind of contradictory hysterical shit-flinging.
He is the UK Prime Minister - first and foremost. He's sticking to his knitting. In this increasingly transactional reality, Countries don't have friends - they have interests. His actions are perfectly understandable.
Frankly, I am cringing in embarrassed members of the Canadian media are baying for Starmer and/or King Charles to carry Canada's water. God, the docility and timidness is bred to bone with those pack of Canadian MSM dogs.
Canadians and Canadian pols are responsible for our course. Lets get to it with verve, imagination and grit.
I am absolutely pissed at Starmer,this article helped me with the perspective tho .I am unimpressed(understatement of the year)With Starmers casual sucking up to Trump.It feels shitty from my Canadian perspective and feels very much like he hasn't really paid attention to our shared history. So hopefully when he has pulled his nose out of dear leaders butt he might get on with bit of remembering.
Believe that this reaction reflects a general undercurrent that while Charles can wear multiple crowns, in the final analysis there was a strong likelihood that UK crown sits most prominently on his head. Since we have almost always been in agreement within the Western Alliance and within the Commonwealth on broad strokes this potential conflict has always remained potential.
Agree that in 2025 our king should not be freelancing in public on such critical issues. Even his views in private should be guided by advice obtained from our elected leaders. However, assume Russian troops had occupied part of Baffin Island but Starmer wanted King Charles to invite Putin to a meeting. Would we not expect that our sovereign would at least consult with us before he went ahead? Feels too cute by half for an argument to be made that he is inviting Putin wearing his UK Crown and that he could put on his Canadian crown to take a different position.
Yeah, as I suggest in the piece, we can entertain all kinds of hypotheticals from a theoretical perspective. But let's keep our eye on the ball: the problem with this week's events is Starmer, not Charles. And if we dive into a mini-crisis over the monarch instead of the politics/diplomacy of Trump and the need for political allies - governments of ally countries - we're wasting time and energy on what is not the real problem here.
I was disgusted because the UK is sworn to defend Ukraine, and yet that weak leader Starmer acted like it’s no big deal.
Plus his polls show an overwhelming support for the UK re-joining the EU and not supporting Trump, in fact, Trump is repellant to his voters.
Worst of all? At the same moment Starmer was there, the Tate brothers were being allowed to leave Romania at the special request of the American govt and while they are “supposed to” return, their assets have been returned and they will get out of human trafficking charges since they are now in the US.
Therefore they are also evading prosecution in the UK, where they were charged with human trafficking and in a separate case with tax evasion.
Effectively spitting on the British Justice system as well as the Romanian one.
A little bit of History between Canada and the UK...
In 1982, Justin Trudeau's father, then Canadian PM Pierre E. Trudeau, welcomed King Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth, in Ottawa for the patriation of its Constitution from the British Parliament and the signing of Canada's own revised Constitution. The United Kingdom thus renounced any remaining responsibility for, or jurisdiction over, Canada.
Our system of government is a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. King Charles is King of Canada and Head of State. The Governor General is the representative of the King in Canada.
Still I wonder why we have a King. The King of the whole Commonwealth maybe? Fly a Canadian flag outside Buckingham Palace. I'm sure they have writers who could write something subtle to suggest the Commonwealth is still a sizeable institution.
I was hoping you'd address this issue and I think your analysis is spot on. No fault attaches to Charles (yet) but my God, it was nauseating to see Starmer behave in that cowardly, servile manner in front of Trump. "A second state visit! It's unprecedented! A first in history!" And to make it worse: "You're trying to find a divide between us that doesn't exist...we didn't discuss Canada." Jesus.
I fully understand he didn't want to poke Trump in the eye by mounting a furious defence of Canada, but he still could have said something along the lines of: "Canada is a long-standing member of the western alliance of democratic nations. We will never forget the price Canada has paid to support both Britain and the US in many, many military efforts both decades ago and more recently." It doesn't go far enough but it would have been something at least.
In the end...even Starmer knows he beclowned himself, and despite all that, there's no guarantee that his desperate performance will save the UK from Trump's crosshairs.
Totally agree…it’s like he just ignored NATO, ignored the Commonwealth
It’s not just Starmer, but the whole of the UK that’s the problem here. They’ve weakened themselves through Brexit, which makes them easy picking for the bully in the White House.
Even so, it’s an example of what one commentator calls the first rule of foreign relations: “Nations don’t have friends. They have interests.” The UK will only act to support Canada if and to the extent it is in their interest to do so.
As for the King, I agree 100% this is for the 2 governments to resolve. There’s a minor but instructive precedent in the effort to give Conrad Black his peerage. The offer was made by HM on behalf her UK government, only to be told no by her government in Canada. The palace told the 2 governments to work it out.
Thanks so much for setting the record straight
I feel for King Charles having to put on this farce because his pm has chosen appeasement
I agree with your analysis.
Starmer has proven disappointing on a number of fronts, this is just another failure. He’s a weak leader, it appears. Sorry for Britain. Hope it doesn’t affect us or Ukraine.
I agree with your analysis. Everyone is acting appropriately within the current system. But your post also points to a serious weakness in the system created by sharing a head of state with other countries.
It’s reasonable for Canadians to want a head of state to speak out in defense of national sovereignty. For the reasons you’ve explained, that’s not going to happen. Given the current threat to our sovereignty, that’s an issue.
Final point: If the shoe was on the other foot, and British sovereignty was being threatened, would the palace tell the British government that the King can’t say anything that might not be in line with the Canadian government’s interests?
Starmer is enjoying a honeymoon of a sorts with the current American administration. Good for him and his country. History shows it will be short and then he, and his country, will be in for whirlwind of contradictory hysterical shit-flinging.
He is the UK Prime Minister - first and foremost. He's sticking to his knitting. In this increasingly transactional reality, Countries don't have friends - they have interests. His actions are perfectly understandable.
Frankly, I am cringing in embarrassed members of the Canadian media are baying for Starmer and/or King Charles to carry Canada's water. God, the docility and timidness is bred to bone with those pack of Canadian MSM dogs.
Canadians and Canadian pols are responsible for our course. Lets get to it with verve, imagination and grit.
I am absolutely pissed at Starmer,this article helped me with the perspective tho .I am unimpressed(understatement of the year)With Starmers casual sucking up to Trump.It feels shitty from my Canadian perspective and feels very much like he hasn't really paid attention to our shared history. So hopefully when he has pulled his nose out of dear leaders butt he might get on with bit of remembering.
I swear (or affirm)
That I will be faithful
And bear true allegiance
To His Majesty
King Charles the Third
King of Canada
His Heirs and Successors
Nope.
And that I will faithfully observe
The laws of Canada
Including the Constitution
Which recognizes and affirms
The Aboriginal and treaty rights of
First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples
And fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
Yep.
Believe that this reaction reflects a general undercurrent that while Charles can wear multiple crowns, in the final analysis there was a strong likelihood that UK crown sits most prominently on his head. Since we have almost always been in agreement within the Western Alliance and within the Commonwealth on broad strokes this potential conflict has always remained potential.
Agree that in 2025 our king should not be freelancing in public on such critical issues. Even his views in private should be guided by advice obtained from our elected leaders. However, assume Russian troops had occupied part of Baffin Island but Starmer wanted King Charles to invite Putin to a meeting. Would we not expect that our sovereign would at least consult with us before he went ahead? Feels too cute by half for an argument to be made that he is inviting Putin wearing his UK Crown and that he could put on his Canadian crown to take a different position.
Yeah, as I suggest in the piece, we can entertain all kinds of hypotheticals from a theoretical perspective. But let's keep our eye on the ball: the problem with this week's events is Starmer, not Charles. And if we dive into a mini-crisis over the monarch instead of the politics/diplomacy of Trump and the need for political allies - governments of ally countries - we're wasting time and energy on what is not the real problem here.
I was disgusted because the UK is sworn to defend Ukraine, and yet that weak leader Starmer acted like it’s no big deal.
Plus his polls show an overwhelming support for the UK re-joining the EU and not supporting Trump, in fact, Trump is repellant to his voters.
Worst of all? At the same moment Starmer was there, the Tate brothers were being allowed to leave Romania at the special request of the American govt and while they are “supposed to” return, their assets have been returned and they will get out of human trafficking charges since they are now in the US.
Therefore they are also evading prosecution in the UK, where they were charged with human trafficking and in a separate case with tax evasion.
Effectively spitting on the British Justice system as well as the Romanian one.
Quite striking how irrelevant the Commonwealth or Crown has become over the past half century without most Monarchists' realization.
Very sensible! Starmer's schoolboy suckling up to Trump and pretending not to know his best friend who is being beaten up is beyond cowardly!
A little bit of History between Canada and the UK...
In 1982, Justin Trudeau's father, then Canadian PM Pierre E. Trudeau, welcomed King Charles' mother, Queen Elizabeth, in Ottawa for the patriation of its Constitution from the British Parliament and the signing of Canada's own revised Constitution. The United Kingdom thus renounced any remaining responsibility for, or jurisdiction over, Canada.
Our system of government is a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. King Charles is King of Canada and Head of State. The Governor General is the representative of the King in Canada.
https://trkingston.substack.com/p/dear-american-athlete
I swear (or affirm)
That I will be faithful
And bear true allegiance
To His Majesty
King Charles the Third
King of Canada
His Heirs and Successors
And that I will faithfully observe
The laws of Canada
Including the Constitution
Which recognizes and affirms
The Aboriginal and treaty rights of
First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples
And fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
Seriously, take that first paragraph out if we're in anyway serious.
Otherwise it's a fucking joke.
Still I wonder why we have a King. The King of the whole Commonwealth maybe? Fly a Canadian flag outside Buckingham Palace. I'm sure they have writers who could write something subtle to suggest the Commonwealth is still a sizeable institution.