Why Anglo-Based Countries Need to Unite: The United States Joining the British Commonwealth, By Chris Knight (Florida)
The New York Post article, titled "Trump suggests US could be 'associate member' of British Commonwealth: 'I love King Charles,'"
details President Donald Trump's surprising openness to the United States joining the British Commonwealth as an "associate member." The piece stems from Trump's reaction to a British tabloid report (The Sun) claiming King Charles III intends to extend a "secret offer" during Trump's upcoming state visit to the UK later in 2025. Trump expressed his enthusiasm on Truth Social, writing, "I Love King Charles. Sounds good to me!" alongside a link to the article.
The Commonwealth of Nations, a voluntary association of 56 countries—mostly former British colonies—promotes trade, democracy, and cultural ties, with King Charles III as its ceremonial head. The idea of U.S. associate membership, while unprecedented given America's history of breaking from British rule in 1776, reportedly aims to strengthen the U.S.-UK "special relationship." Sources cited by The Sun suggest Trump's fondness for Britain and the royal family could make him receptive, with potential benefits like easing tensions with Canada (a Commonwealth member) amid Trump's tariff threats and talks of annexation.
The article notes Trump's prior interactions with the royals—he met Queen Elizabeth II and then-Prince Charles in 2019—and his recent praise for Charles as a "beautiful man" during a February 27, 2025, meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. While Buckingham Palace and the White House haven't commented, the proposal has sparked debate, with some seeing it as a diplomatic olive branch amid strained U.S.-EU relations over Ukraine and others questioning its feasibility given America's revolutionary past.
The notion of Anglo-based countries—those rooted in British colonial history, language, and legal traditions, like the U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—uniting carries weight in today's fractured global landscape. Here's why this idea, as hinted at by Trump's Commonwealth flirtation, resonates:
1.Geopolitical Strength Amid Rising Threats: The world's shifting power dynamics—China's economic and military rise, Russia's war in the Ukraine, and instability in the Middle East—demand a cohesive response. Anglo nations share a legacy of democratic governance and a common-law framework, making them natural allies. A united front, whether through the Commonwealth or a broader "Anglosphere" pact, could counterbalance authoritarian blocs. The U.S. alone boasts a $26 trillion GDP, while the UK, Canada, and Australia add roughly $6 trillion combined—together, that's a formidable economic and military bloc.
2.Cultural and Historical Bonds: These countries aren't just linked by language; they share a cultural DNA—Shakespeare, Locke, the Magna Carta—that's distinct from continental Europe or Asia. Trump's "I love King Charles" quip nods to this sentimental tie, a soft power asset often overlooked. The Commonwealth already proves this works: 56 nations, from India to Jamaica, cohere around shared history despite vast differences. Adding the U.S. could amplify that model, reinforcing an identity that's fraying under globalisation.
3.Economic Resilience: Trade wars and supply chain chaos (think Trump's tariffs on Canada) expose vulnerabilities. Anglo countries could lean on each other—Canada's resources, Australia's minerals, the UK's finance hub, America's tech and manufacturing muscle—to build a self-reliant network. The Commonwealth cuts trade costs by 19 percent among members (per the Council on Foreign Relations); extending that to the U.S. could shield against external shocks like China's market dominance.
4.Countering Internal Division: Look at Berlin's crime surge or Ireland's immigration tensions—Anglo societies face parallel strains: identity debates, border pressures, crime spikes tied to migration. Uniting doesn't mean erasing borders but pooling sovereignty to tackle shared woes. McGregor's anti-immigration run in Ireland or Musk's South Africa warnings echo a common anxiety about losing cultural moorings. A stronger Anglo alliance could standardise policies, from immigration to security, without EU-style overreach.
5.A Bulwark Against Ideological Drift: The Anglo world's historically championed individual liberty and free markets, but that's under siege—China's surveillance state and Europe's bureaucratic sprawl offer rival visions. Trump's nod to the Commonwealth, however quirky, signals a desire to anchor the U.S. to something tangible, not just NATO's military frame or the UN's toothless platitudes. Anglo unity could preserve that liberal tradition against both external foes and internal decay.
Anglo-sceptics will cry foul—America joining a British-led group smells like a rollback of 1776, a betrayal of "America First." The Founding Fathers didn't bleed for this, they'd say, and Canada's liberals would recoil at cozying up to Trump's MAGA vibe. Practically, too, "associate membership" is vague—trade perks? Symbolic gestures? It's not like the U.S. needs Charles's face on its quarters. And the Commonwealth's not spotless—some members flout democracy, others limp economically.
Yet the case holds: Anglo countries face a world where isolation's a luxury they can't afford. Berlin's spiralling homicides, South Africa's farm attacks, Ireland's rural shifts—these aren't isolated dots but a pattern of strain on Western-rooted societies. Unity doesn't mean uniformity; it means leveraging what's already there—language, law, history—to face what's coming. Trump's offhand "sounds good" might just be the spark that forces the question: if not now, when? As an Anglo-American with deep British roots, I say, let's go for it!
https://merionwest.com/2024/11/29/appreciating-americas-distinctly-british-heritage/
Comments