Donald Trump has an undeniable appetite for grandeur, and Britain has served up a feast this week. From the majestic halls of Windsor Castle to the country elegance of Chequers — the country house of the U.K.’s prime minister — the American president’s historic second state visit was steeped in ceremonial splendour. Yet beneath the horse-drawn carriages and lavish banquets lies a calculated diplomatic gambit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer is wagering that centuries-old traditions and The Firm’s soft power can help him navigate the complexities of dealing with a notably unpredictable president, and safeguard Britain’s future interests. This is far from a conventional diplomatic engagement. Trump stands alone as the first U.S. president to receive two state visits, a distinction that reflects both his well-documented fascination with British royalty and the U.K.’s strategic determination to maintain close ties. He has Scottish heritage through his mother and has frequently expressed admiration for the late Queen Elizabeth II. While many global leaders have no doubt found Trump’s approach challenging, the British establishment has chosen to amplify the royal spectacle – serving up the kind of ceremonial grandeur that appeals to his appreciation for pomp and pageantry. The visit commenced with full monarchical honours. A ceremonial carriage procession, military aircraft display, and an elaborate state banquet at Windsor Castle, presided over by King Charles III, who continues his royal duties while undergoing cancer treatment. For the palace, this transcended mere protocol – it was a demonstration of Britain’s enduring stability, continuity, and diplomatic finesse at a time when its global standing faces scrutiny. For Trump, it represented grand-scale validation, reinforcing his status as a statesman worthy of royal recognition. During the magnificent Windsor banquet, Trump displayed unusual restraint. Typically prone to going off-piste from prepared speeches, he maintained strict adherence to his script – a tactical choice likely aimed at pleasing his hosts and avoiding diplomatic complications. He particularly praised Prince William, highlighting him as an embodiment of stability and tradition. The conspicuous absence of any reference to Prince Harry, whose complicated relationship with the Royal Family remains contentious on both sides of the Atlantic, spoke volumes. This calculated omission has inevitably sparked discussion about Trump’s view of the monarchy’s future direction. While Windsor showcased ceremonial splendour, Chequers focused on practical matters. Starmer, leading Labour’s government, recognizes that Trump isn’t a natural ideological ally. The gulf between a right-wing populist president and a centre-left prime minister presents obvious challenges. However, political reality demands pragmatism. As Britain charts its post-Brexit economic course, Trump’s demonstrated willingness to weaponize tariffs has created global market uncertainty. Starmer’s objectives were clear: Secure favourable trade arrangements, minimize tariff risks, and position Britain as a dependable partner in technological and nuclear energy cooperation. Yet the political choreography remains overshadowed by Trump’s often overbearing and disruptive nature. He flourishes in creating disruption, dismissing conventional protocols, and commanding the narrative. His supporters champion him as a strongman who challenges global establishments, whilst his critics view him as a destabilizing influence. In London and Windsor, demonstrators were determined to make their presence felt, despite governmental efforts to orchestrate the visit away from Trump and his team. This visit’s essence lies in the delicate balance between monarchical splendour and political pragmatism. Britain is deploying its centuries-old royal traditions to address a thoroughly modern challenge: Managing an ally who is simultaneously indispensable and unpredictable. The ‘special relationship’ has always demanded careful cultivation. During the Cold War, it centred on nuclear deterrence. Throughout the Iraq conflict, it focused on military collaboration. Today, it involves navigating a global landscape transformed by populism and intensifying power rivalries. PM Starmer’s gambit King Charles’ role as host as well as diplomat-in-chief carries profound significance. His decision to participate whilst undergoing cancer treatment emphasizes the monarchy’s stabilizing influence. King Charles always has to remain apolitical, yet here he lent his presence to an occasion both ceremonially significant and strategically crucial. For Trump, it provided another opportunity to bask in royal recognition, something he has consistently valued. For Starmer, it reinforced the monarchy’s enduring value as one of Britain’s most effective diplomatic instruments. While Trump immerses himself in royal pageantry, for Prime Minister Starmer the visit extends far beyond managing Trump’s unconventional diplomatic style. It presents a vital opportunity to establish himself as a credible international statesman, one capable of balancing Britain’s domestic imperatives with the nuanced requirements of global diplomacy. This is in the shadow of Prime Minister Starmer having a particularly awful few weeks domestically, with the loss of his Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner; the British Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson who was caught up in the Epstein scandal; and the rise of the right-wing anti-immigration movement in the U.K. Starmer recognizes that his tenure as prime minister will be judged not only by his domestic achievements but equally by his international standing. By strategically positioning himself alongside Trump before the cameras at Chequers and negotiating crucial agreements on trade and technology, he aims to project an image of steadfast leadership – someone capable of managing complex global partnerships whilst maintaining Britain’s international relevance. The critical question remains whether this visit will solidify such a reputation, or if Trump’s commanding presence will overshadow these diplomatic efforts. However, challenges loom. Trump’s propensity for commenting on foreign domestic affairs is well-documented, and the ongoing Epstein controversy continues to plague his reputation stateside. Starmer’s decisive removal of Mandelson serves as a stark reminder of ever-present controversies. The diplomatic landscape is further complicated by Elon Musk’s provocative video message to a far-right gathering in London, introducing yet another layer of complexity to an already intricate diplomatic scenario. Britain’s post-Brexit identity How, then, should we interpret Trump’s ceremonial return? On one level, it represents theatrical diplomacy – a former president embracing monarchical grandeur whilst Britain deploys its royal influence to manage a complex diplomatic relationship. Yet beneath the surface lie substantive political matters: Negotiations on trade, tariff discussions, nuclear cooperation, and Ukraine’s destiny. Fundamentally, it illustrates Britain’s ongoing struggle to define its post-Brexit identity, caught between its imperial legacy and contemporary geopolitical realities. As Trump’s convoy traversed Windsor and Chequers, global attention focused not merely on ceremonial gestures and formal dinners, but on the underlying narrative: Can Britain’s distinctive blend of traditional ceremony and diplomatic pragmatism still influence global political discourse? Or will the ceremonial splendour merely mask the formidable challenges that lie ahead? For the moment, the royal processions and ceremonial welcomes were rolled out to do their job – flatter President Trump. However, once the formal ceremonies conclude, it will be the trade agreements secured and promises exchanged that determine whether this state visit becomes a pivotal moment, or merely an elaborate display. More from Afua Hagan:
