Amid fraught U.S.-U.K. relations, what impact can King Charles’s state visit have?

When King Charles lands in Washington, D.C., on Monday, his arrival will set off four days of pomp, circumstance and events that normally are part of such state visits.

Yet given the geopolitical tenor of the times, Charles’s first visit to the United States as monarch poses significant diplomatic challenges for the King. The trip comes at the behest of the U.K. government and Prime Minister Keir Starmer, but follows U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated criticisms, denigrations and dismissive outbursts against them both, particularly over the war in Iran.

Indeed, even with the “soft power” royalty routinely deploys — and Trump’s well-known adulation of monarchy — questions arise over what impact Charles’s visit can have given the strain in the “special relationship” the transatlantic allies have valued for decades.

“I think the idea is not to assume an immediate impact,” Garret Martin, a professor at American University’s school of international service in Washington, D.C., said in an interview.

“The difference is some of the issues of friction, I think, are well ingrained and are not subjects to be easily addressed.

“I think maybe the idea of such a visit … is more of a bet on the medium to long term, which is a reminder of the importance of this relationship, an invocation of a shared story and a shared history.”

Presidents will come and go, Martin said, “but the hope is that this stronger connection can endure.”

Trump, for his part, told the BBC on Thursday that the visit could help fix relations.

The broadcaster reported that when asked in a phone interview whether the King’s visit could help repair the relationship between the two countries, the president said: “Absolutely. He’s fantastic. He’s a fantastic man. Absolutely the answer is yes.”

The connection between the two countries has often been referred to as the “special relationship,” an expression born in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War by a U.K. prime minister making a speech in 1946 in Fulton, Mo.

“It started off with [Winston] Churchill and then it’s grown into just reflecting how the U.K. and the U.S. are … perhaps unusually close as two independent countries,” Craig Prescott, a constitutional expert and lecturer in law at Royal Holloway, University of London, said in an interview. 

It’s a relationship that has manifested itself in everything from foreign policy and intelligence-sharing to culture, turning up in movies or shows on both sides of the Atlantic.

“You could say something like The Diplomat on Netflix ties all this together…. In many ways, it’s a ridiculous program, but it does reflect how closely the U.K. government and the U.S. government typically work together, or have done at certain times in history,” said Prescott.

But these don’t seem to be typical times.

Relations between the two countries are “fraught,” said Martin, but he sees a useful and notable distinction between what’s occurring at the highest levels of power and the day-to-day operations of government.

“The U.K. still has a lot of open doors [in Washington] and of course deep trade and cultural connections…. But at the upper level, it is a challenging period, to say the least.”

The visit has sparked a debate in the U.K., something that is unusual for a state visit, said Prescott.

“Normally, state visits are not politically controversial, but Donald Trump is a politically controversial figure here in the U.K.”

Still, the visit is going ahead.  

“Delaying or postponing or abandoning the state visit would have been like a diplomatic catastrophe, because that really would have … put relations at a very low ebb,” said Prescott.

The visit is billed as an effort to mark the 250th anniversary of American independence and will see King Charles make two speeches that will be under intense scrutiny for what is — and isn’t — said. 

One speech comes at a state dinner — standard fare for any such visit — and one comes in front of a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress, only the second time a U.K. monarch has done so, following the address by Charles’s mother, Queen Elizabeth, in 1991.

Charles “seems to like doing a speech to the legislature of the country he’s visiting,” said Prescott. He noted the speeches he’s made in places such as France and Germany “have content,” make points and aren’t as “coded,” as his mother’s were.

“He did confront the past between Britain and Germany very explicitly … so it’s going to be interesting to see how all that plays out in the speech to Congress,” said Prescott.

Martin says Charles faces a “delicate balancing act” in the speech.

“He has to remember he’s speaking to that audience that is in the room, but he’s also speaking to the American people. And also it will be a speech that will be scrutinized at home, so being obsequious towards President Trump or excessive flattery, I think, will not play well at home and for parts of the constituencies in the United States.”

All told, the visit — which will also see King Charles and Queen Camilla visit New York City and Virginia — comes with significant risks, particularly of the unexpected.

Might a member of Congress shout something during the King’s speech? Might Trump go off script and make a disparaging remark about Starmer or something else?

“I think they’re the two big risks, really, that are a bigger risk than a normal state visit,” said Prescott.

Such visits are highly scrutinized as much for the informal as the formal moments — Martin will be watching the body language and how Charles and Trump interact. And there could also be insight in what isn’t mentioned over the four days.

“It is well known, of course, that King Charles has a strong commitment to the preservation of the environment. That’s not necessarily an issue where he would see eye to eye with President Trump. So will that simply not be mentioned or will that be mentioned indirectly? That will be interesting,” said Martin.

“Obviously, with [Charles’s] titular role over Canada and [Trump’s] threats of Canada being annexed or the 51st state, will that also not be mentioned?”

Overall, the potential impact of the visit remains very much an open question.

Prescott sees “at most” that it might offer Trump a “greater understanding of Britain’s position on Iran,” something that would come through the private meetings between the president and the King.

“There’s not going to be a meeting in the Oval Office with cameras recording it, because that’s not how the King operates,” he said.

“That would be perhaps, I think, the real hope, and more broadly I think is to portray the present difficulties in the broader context of the 250 years … and that the relationship between the U.K. and the U.S. has always been strong. It’s always waxed and waned, but it could be strong in the future.”

The last time a U.K. monarch spoke in U.S. Congress

When Queen Elizabeth spoke to the U.S. Congress in 1991, she opened her remarks by noting it was a “rare privilege to address a meeting of your two houses,” and thanked members for inviting her.

“Your Congress and our Parliament are the twin pillars of our civilizations and the chief among the many treasures that we have inherited from our predecessors,” she said.

The speech was set against the international conflicts of the day.

“Both our countries saw the invasion of Kuwait in just the same terms: an outrage to be reversed, both for the people of Kuwait and for the sake of the principle that naked aggression should not prevail,” she said. 

“Our views were identical and so were our responses. That response was not without risk, but we have both learned from history that we must not allow aggression to succeed.” 

At the time, Prescott said, it was viewed “as a fairly vanilla speech.”

“When you watch the speech or read the text, it’s all about co-operation between Europe and America post-Cold War and belief in the UN and … effectively what’s called the international rules-based order.”

It was also viewed, Prescott said, as a typical speech Queen Elizabeth made, “in a sense a statement of the obvious that you soon forget afterwards.”

Watching it now, however, he said, “it feels like a remarkable speech because almost everything she’s said has broken down and it’s remarkable in terms of how far we’ve come and how things that were taken as read are now incredibly controversial.”

In that sense, Prescott said, “the speech is more remarkable now in 2026 than it was in 1991.”

Royally quotable

“Much about the times we now live in I suspect may have troubled her deeply, but I take heart from her belief that goodness will always prevail and that a brighter dawn is never far from the horizon.”

— King Charles, in a message to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the birth of his mother, Queen Elizabeth, on April 21, 1926.

Royal reads

The Prince and Princess of Wales paid tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth on what would have been her 100th birthday with a message praising her for “inspiring generations through a lifetime of duty.” [BBC]

U.S. President Donald Trump has said Prince Harry was “not speaking for the U.K.” when he called for the U.S. to show “leadership” on Ukraine — comments that came days before King Charles was due to meet the president. [BBC] 

Prince Harry has entered an active minefield in Ukraine and spoken of his sadness that 30 years after his mother’s famous trip to Angola, yet another cleanup is underway in a conflict zone. [ITV]

The Prince and Princess of Wales have released a video of Prince Louis playing on a beach in Cornwall to mark his eighth birthday. [BBC]

Historian Anna Keay has been named as the official biographer of the late Queen Elizabeth II. [ITV]