Charles and Camilla do Washington, Louisville to Warm Welcome

“At the request of the British Government Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall will make a four-day visit to the United States of America,” the announcement from Clarence House stated. Why issue a “request” to the next king of Great Britain when a proposal or suggestion would have conveyed the message just as well? The aim was to stress that this trip was being undertaken at the government’s express desire as a reminder, the statement went on “of the values and history shared by the United States and the United Kingdom.”

To the coalition government of Prime Minister David Cameron, living out its last months before a general election, such a reminder of core values must have seemed timely amid growing transatlantic differences over issues, on which more later. In March, the royal couple charmed their way through two event-packed days in Washington and a further one-and-a-half in Louisville, Kentucky. They met a surprisingly broad cross-section of Americans from the president and members of Congress to high school students, army vets and newly arrived immigrants learning English at a D.C. charter school.

An affable, high-spirited Prince Charles delivered speeches about the world today and the environment, tried bowling (probably for the first time) and sambaed to the music of a Mexican combo. At Mount Vernon, Charles and Camilla were introduced to a newborn lamb on what used to be George Washington’s farm.

Camilla’s solo events included watching a lively high school performance of a scene from Shakespeare’s “As You Like It” at the Shakespeare Company Theatre and visiting a sexual assault response team in Washington. The duchess has made rape and sexual assault prevention one of her main interests, and has visited prevention centers all over the world.

Accepting the prestigious Teddy Roosevelt Award for Exceptional Leadership in Conservation from the International Conservation Caucus Foundation, a leading bi-partisan conservation group, gave Charles the opportunity to voice his passion for environmental issues including deforestation, declining wildlife, overfishing and sustainable cities. He then pointedly reminded his audience that after more than 20 years, the United States has still not signed on to the 1994 U.N. Law of the Sea Convention which, among other issues, provides for constraints in overfishing and has been ratified by 163 countries. He also mentioned another agreement not signed — the 2004 international Agreement on Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels, which currently has 13 member countries and seeks to conserve albatrosses and petrels by coordinating cross-border efforts to reduce the threat to their populations.

Tucked into the royal’s program was a black-tie dinner for wealthy American supporters of the Prince of Wales’ U.S. Foundation at the home of Mrs. Joe Albritton, chairperson of the Foundation. Charles and Camilla also called on President Obama at the White House who was responsible for what was possibly the only awkward moment of the visit.

On camera, Obama told Prince Charles, “I think it’s fair to say that the American people are quite fond of the [British] royal family. They like them much better than their own politicians.” To which Charles quickly replied, “Oh, I don’t believe that,” and deftly changed the subject to his visit earlier that same day to Mount Vernon, which the prince had toured for the first time 40 years ago.

Yet the president was making a point, albeit awkwardly, about the significance of the visit. The fact that the Prince of Wales has been to America 23 times officially (that is, not counting private visits), and met six successive U.S. presidents is emblematic of how close the two countries are at so many levels. The British ambassador, Peter Westmacott, the royal couple’s host in Washington and incidentally a former member of the prince’s staff (he was deputy private secretary to the Prince of Wales), listed the 50th anniversary of the death of Winston Churchill among the reasons for the visit. It was Churchill’s definition in World War II of Anglo-American ties as a “special relationship” that has bedeviled the transatlantic connection ever since, burdening it with expectations that were often too high to fulfill.

Such as now. As commentators on both sides of the Atlantic have been pointing out lately, rarely has so much stood in the way of harmonious relations. On the British side, there is a shared concern with other Europeans at the Obama administration’s seeming declining interest in Europe as a result of President Obama’s “pivot” towards Asia.

In 2013, the Obama administration felt betrayed when the British parliament voted against supporting U.S. military action in Syria in retaliation for President Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons. Prime Minister David Cameron’s government is now planning to cut defense spending to levels that raise questions about the U.K.’s effectiveness as America’s leading military ally.

The Obama administration also failed to dissuade the United Kingdom from becoming a shareholder in the new Chinese-sponsored multilateral development in Asia. The United States views the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) as Beijing’s attempt to set up a rival to the Washington-based and U.S.-led World Bank. The U.S. believes the AIIB is expanding its sphere of influence. An even bigger setback for Washington came in mid-March when Germany, France and Italy followed Britain’s lead and joined the fledgling financial organization.

The May 7th election in the U.K. was viewed with some anxiety in Washington, firstly because of the predictions of an inconclusive result, leading to a period of political uncertainty during lengthy party negotiations to form a viable government, and also because of questions about Britain’s future as a member of the European Union, an organization the U.S. strongly supports.

In addition, it looked as though the Scottish National Party (SNP), which has been gaining strength at the expense of the Labor Party, would end up as the decisive party in forming a British government coalition. But the SNP is unilateralist and opposed to nuclear weapons; so where would that leave Britain’s nuclear submarine fleet if the Scottish party joined the government?

As part of his “assignment,” Prince Charles, in private conversations at the White House and on the Hill, assured U.S. leaders that Britain would continue to regard the relationship as special. At the Cathedral in Louisville, he made a remarkably eloquent speech with the message that responsible nations had to face up together to the current challenges and dangers, before it was too late.

“Because,” said the man who will one day be king of Great Britain, “we are standing at a moment of substantial transition where we face the dual challenges of a world view and an economic system that seem to have enormous shortcomings, together with an environmental crisis — including that of climate change — which threatens to engulf us all.”