BRITISH Prime Minister Theresa May was one of the first few world leaders to have been received by the new United States president in Washington.
As it was customary, an official invitation was sent to any incoming American president to officially visit the United Kingdom.
After all, to London, the relationship with the US is a special one — hence, dubbed as the special relationship. Often, this is more seen from the British viewpoint — somewhat not equally shared by their American cousin. This notion of “standing shoulder to shoulder”, probably stems from the UK trying to play a global role, while the Americans see themselves as being the sole superpower, certainly not on a par with the once colonial power, which had an empire that spanned half the world.
Then, Donald Trump struck! His executive order to ban people from seven Muslim countries had proved to be a disaster in more ways than one.
What transpired was the haphazard way the order was implemented — it became a blanket ban, even preventing bonafide visa and green card holders. This outright discrimination was arguably unconstitutional. There was outrage everywhere, and countries that could retaliate, did so, in whatever form.
In the UK, it had a direct impact.
Apart from protests and demonstrations, parliamentarians began voicing their disgust. One of the “weapons” Britons have is the impending visit by Trump to the UK.
There are two aspects to this. The first is the actual invitation and second, the privilege of an American president to address Parliament, often dubbed as the mother of all parliaments. An online petition started and it has collected nearly two million signatures.
The speaker of the House of Commons, in an unprecedented manner, spoke out against the possibility of the president addressing Parliament. He said by convention, the invitation to the president to speak to Parliament comes from the office of the Speaker, and he, categorically, will not put his signature to the invite.
It seems clear that even if May gets her way and Trump visits London, he will not be addressing Parliament.
Then, there is the issue of cancelling the visit itself. Parliament has little power to prevent the government of the day from cancelling the visit. However, what it wants to do is to debate and create enough attention to put extra pressure on the government not to go ahead with the visit.
It seems that the main argument put forth by the prime minister is that, the US is arguably UK’s closest ally and, therefore, the visit is symbolic of this special relationship.
To a large extent, this is not based on the premise of a particular president, but on the nature of the relationship itself. The ties are multifaceted — historical, political, economic and socially.
It would appear that implicit to the government’s view is that the policies announced by Trump are essentially domestic and, therefore, do not fundamentally affect the relationship. Therefore, so long as the relationship remains strong and intact, it should follow convention by extending an invitation to the new US president.
The fact that May was one of the first world leaders to be invited to the White House is testimony to this relationship.
The press conference involving the two leaders showed that, despite the somewhat inexperienced Trump, it went well and showed genuine warmth. The glimpse of both
of them holding hands illustrates this in an informal manner.
Given the “honour” bestowed to the “unlikely” UK prime minister (May was never thought to be in the running for the top job as it was Boris Johnson who was the likely successor to David Cameron), it does put added pressure on her to reciprocate the honour to Trump.
To a large extent, this whole debate is a personal embarrassment to May, at least from the eyes of the president. How she handles the situation will certainly be watched by Trump's political circle.
To begin with, the argument against the visit has close to two million who have signed a petition against the visit, as it could embarrass the Queen. The essence of the argument against such a visit rests on the fact that Trump embodies the increased level of racism and anti-foreigner, which is fast becoming endemic.
The Queen, as the head of the Commonwealth, presides over 52 member countries, many of whom are Muslims. The Queen is not only fully committed to the Commonwealth, but is also believed to be personally fond of the organisation.
Trump is not only seen to represent the rise of racism but also the rise of conservatism, even trying to turn the clock back on issues like climate change, of which the heir to the British throne, Prince Charles, is most passionate about.
As the Trump administration is still unravelling its policy direction, there is much concern as to the extent of changes that will be brought about over the next few months.
This uncertainty makes any visit a little difficult — one does not know what other things Trump will pull out from his hat.
To a large extent, it is a Catch-22 situation for the UK.
Cancelling the trip would have repercussions on bilateral ties, at a time when UK needs all the goodwill from the US, with it leaving the European Union soon. However, going ahead with the visit runs the risks of huge protests within the UK, and the government having to be wary of the domestic backlash.
One thing is certain. Never before has the coming of a new president brought so much uncertainty and unpredictability, something which the world —given the current economic global morass — can ill afford.
What will probably happen is a slight compromise, where the full state visit may be postponed to another date, while a much more “working” visit may take place this year. Whichever, there will not be a dull moment with Trump, that’s for sure.
**The author is currently and adviser to a private think tank based in Kuala Lumpur. He obtained his doctorate in International Relations from the University of Oxford.