King Charles Defends U.S., NATO Alliance During Address To Congress

A 'REAL' KING LECTURES AMERIKA ON DEMOCRACY

President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump host King Charles III and Queen Camilla of the UK and Northern Ireland during a state visit, April 28, 2026. Photo Credit: White House, X

April 29, 2026 

The Center Square
By Sarah Roderick-Fitch

(The Center Square) – In honor of the United States’ 250th birthday, King Charles III delivered a joint address in Congress Tuesday afternoon, highlighting the bond between the U.S. and the United Kingdom.

The king received a warm and enthusiastic welcome in a chamber often at odds with each other, while defending the NATO alliance.

The monarch’s speech was peppered with historical references and a bit of humor, bonding the two nations through their shared values and history.

The monarch began his speech by addressing Saturday’s shooting at the White House Correspondence Dinner, “with unshakable resolve, such acts of violence will never succeed.”


“Whatever our differences, whatever disagreements we may have, we stand united in our commitment to uphold democracy, to protect all our people from harm, and to salute the courage of those who daily risk their lives in the service of country,” the king said.

“Standing here today, it is hard not to feel the weight of history on my shoulder, because the modern relationship between our two nations and our own peoples spans not merely 250 years, but over four centuries,” he told Congress.

“As I look back across the centuries, Mr. Speaker, emerge certain patterns, certain self-evident truths from which we can learn and draw strength with a spirit of 1776, in our minds, we can perhaps agree that we do not always agree, at least in the first instance,” he continued.

“King George, as you know, never set foot in America, and please rest assured, I’m not here as a part of some cunning rear-guard action,” the king quipped, with the chamber erupting in laughter.

“Two hundred and fifty years ago, or as we say in the United Kingdom, just the other day, they declared independence by balancing contending forces and drawing strength in diversity. They united 13 disparate colonies to forge a nation on the revolutionary idea of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” Charles said. “They carried with them and carried forward great inheritance of the British enlightenment, as well as the ideals which had an even deeper history in English, common law and the Magna Carta.”

King Charles underscored the importance of the two nations uniting in leading the rest of the world.

“It is my hope, my prayer, that in these turbulent times, working together and with our international partners, we can stem the beating of plowshares into swords,” the king said.

“The alliance that our two nations have built over the centuries, and for which we are profoundly grateful to the American people, is truly unique, and that alliance is part of what Henry Kissinger described as Kennedy’s soaring vision of an Atlantic partnership based on twin pillars, Europe and America.”

Charles pointed to the challenges in the world, highlighting the current threat in Europe as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues.

“It is an era that is in many ways more volatile and more dangerous than the world to which my late mother spoke in this chamber in 1991, the challenges we face are too great for any one nation to bear alone, but in this unpredictable environment, our alliance cannot rest on past achievements or assume that foundational principles simply endure. As my prime minister said last month, ours is an indispensable partnership. We must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last 80 years. Instead, we must build on it, renewal,” said the monarch.

The king reminded the chamber of NATO’s response following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, in an attempt to defend the alliance following threats by President Donald Trump to pull out of it.


“This year, of course, also marks the 25th anniversary of 911, this atrocity was a defining moment for America, and your pain and shock were felt around the whole world….We stood with you then, and we stand with you now in solemn remembrance of a day that shall never be forgotten…In the immediate aftermath of 911 when NATO invoked Article Five for the first time, and the United Nations Security Council was united in the face of terror, we answered the call together, as our people have done so for more than a century, shoulder to shoulder through two world wars, the Cold War, Afghanistan and moments that have defined our shared security,” Charles said.

“Our common ideals were not only crucial for liberty and equality, they are also the foundation of our shared prosperity, the rule of law, the certainty of stable and accessible rules, an independent judiciary resolving disputes and delivering impartial justice, these speeches created the conditions for centuries of unmatched economic growth in our two countries,” he added.

The monarch also highlighted the two nations’ annual trade of $430 billon, arguing that it binds the two nations.

“The story of the United Kingdom and the United States is at its heart a story of reconciliation, renewal and remarkable partnership from the bitter divisions of 250 years ago, we forged a friendship that has grown into one of the most consequential alliances in human history. I pray with all my heart that our alliance will continue to defend our shared values with our partners in Europe and the commonwealth and across the world.”

The king ended his historic address reiterating a commitment the two leading nations have made over the last century to the safety and security of the free world.

“And so to the United States of America on your 250th birthday, let our two countries rededicate ourselves to each other in the selfless service of our peoples and of all the peoples of the world,” the king concluded.


The king’s speech marks the first time a monarch has addressed a joint session of Congress since 1991, when his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, delivered an address. This marks King Charles III’s first official trip to the U.S. since rising to the throne in 2022.

A WRY WIT

'You'd be speaking French': King Charles pokes fun at Trump during state dinner

Britain's King Charles III used his speech at a state dinner at the White House on Tuesday to poke fun at US President Donald Trump who, in January, told European leaders that without US aid in World War II they would be speaking German. "Dare I say that, if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking French," Charles quipped.


Issued on: 29/04/2026 -
By: FRANCE 24

US President Donald Trump and Britain's King Charles III talk during a State Dinner in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on April 28, 2026. © Henry Nicholls, AFP
02:06

King Charles III gave US President Donald Trump a taste of his own medicine at a White House state dinner on Tuesday when he joked that without the British, Americans would be speaking French.

As the heads of state traded jokes during their dinner toasts, Charles referenced previous comments by Trump aimed at European allies he accuses of freeloading on defense since World War II.

"You recently commented, Mr. President, that if it were not for the United States, European countries would be speaking German. Dare I say that, if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking French," Charles quipped.

The king was talking about places with British and French origins in North America, where the rival colonial powers battled for control of the continent before US independence 250 years ago.


At the Davos summit in January, Trump said that without US help in World War II, "you'd be speaking German and a little Japanese."

But the king's lighthearted remark reflected the warm tone as he and Trump bonded over the "special relationship" between London and Washington, despite tensions over the war in Iran.

READ MORE  King Charles calls for US-UK unity in speech to US Congress amid Iran tensions

He made further jokes at Trump's expense, saying he could not help noticing the "readjustments" to the White House East Wing, which the former real estate tycoon has demolished to build a giant $400 million ballroom.

"I am sorry to say that we British, of course, made our own attempt at real estate redevelopment of the White House in 1814," he said, when British soldiers torched the building.

Charles also quipped that the dinner was "a very considerable improvement on the Boston Tea Party", when colonists dumped shiploads of taxed British tea into the sea in 1773.

Trump – an avid fan of the British royals whose mother hailed from Scotland – saved most of his humour for domestic targets.

THE DEBATE © FRANCE 24
42:26

"I want to congratulate Charles on having made a fantastic speech today at Congress," Trump said. "He got the Democrats to stand – I've never been able to do that."

The king meanwhile came bearing a gift, part of a British charm offensive aimed at Trump after he lambasted Prime Minister Keir Starmer over his refusal to help against Iran.

Charles presented the president with the bell from the British submarine HMS Trump, which was launched in 1944 during World War II.

"May it stand as a testimony to our nations' shared history and shining future. And should you ever need to get hold of us, well, just give us a ring," the king said to applause.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

The Axis of Terror: The Destructive Price of America’s Blind Allegiance to Israel

M. Reza Behnam

 April 20, 2026

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Photograph Source: NAVCENT Public Affairs – Public Domain

The unprovoked joint U.S.-Israeli war launched against Iran on 28 February 2026 will manifestly change West Asia.  When it ends, Arab despots, who allowed their countries to be used as platforms for aggression against Iran, will confront a new reality.

The safety and stability they thought was theirs based on fealty to the United States and its Israeli proxy was shattered as Iranian missiles and drones were en route to destroy the U.S. military and intelligence installations they had allowed on their soil; a subordination they falsely believed would protect them.

The Arab world is learning the hard way what the late-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in his cold logic, implied decades ago about American foreign policy: “The word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”

On the other hand, it is clear that Iran does not abandon its allies, having supported the just cause of the Palestinians for 47 years.  And during the current war, Tehran has refused to abandon its Lebanese Hezbollah allies as well. It has adopted a “peace for all or no peace” stance, refusing peace negotiations/accords that would not include its regional allies.

Deep-seated militarism and distrust, hallmarks of the region, are directly linked to a legacy of foreign intervention: the post-WWI breakup of the Ottoman Empire; the 1948 imposition of the Zionist colony in Palestine; and America’s unwavering support for its killing machine.

From the Truman Doctrine to the Carter Doctrine, the Persian Gulf and its natural resources have been regarded as “vital interests” of the United States, to keep riches in the hands of wealthy Americans.  Every U.S. president has declared a willingness to use “any means necessary” to dominate the region.

To “protect its interests” and its Israeli proxy, the United States has operated 19 military bases across roughly 10 countries in West Asia, housing 40-50,000 military personnel. Of that number eight were considered permanent installations, while the others were temporary or forward-operating sites.  It also deployed several naval ships to the Mediterranean; with the headquarters of the anti-Iran naval armada, the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, anchored in Bahrain.

Prior to the latest Zionist instigated war on the Islamic Republic, these sites had been used by America to spy on, destabilize and attack Iran as well as other Muslim countries.

For example, the drone that killed Quds commander, General Qassem Soleimani and several others, including Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, in 2020, was flown from the Al-Udeid air base in Qatar, home of U.S. Central Command.   It is worth noting that the Iraqis assassinated in the attack were Qatar’s fellow Arabs; Soleimani was the lone Persian among them.

It is important not to forget that the presence of U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia was identified by al-Qaeda as a primary reason for the attacks of 11 September 2001; this in addition to Washington’s unconditional support for Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians.

When the Arab states outsourced their security to the United States, believing they had purchased safety and security, they essentially relinquished their sovereignty; this is especially true of the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states that border the Persian Gulf: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Beyond military bases, the U.S. has dominated these Gulf regimes through economic ties, security partnerships and massive arms sales, which have created dependence on American military technology, training and maintenance.

As Washington built up its military in the region and increased its threats to use force if Iran did not surrender to its (essentially Israeli) demands, the Islamic Republic, in an official letter to the United Nations (19 February 2026), reaffirmed once again that if subjected to military aggression, it would:

“respond decisively and proportionately in the exercise of its inherent right      of self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. In such circumstances, all bases, facilities, and assets of the hostile force in the region would constitute legitimate targets in the context of Iran’s defensive response. The United States would bear full and direct responsibility for any unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences.”

Soon after the joint U.S.-Israeli strikes and targeted assassination of 86-year old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family on 28 February, Iran launched retaliatory attacks on U.S. bases in the Gulf; installations used to strike the country.

Ironically, the Gulf monarchies have based their security on the primary source of regional insecurity. Washington’s unconditional support of Israel has made the entire region a target.

Despite warnings of the risks to the economic and structural stability of its Gulf partners, the Trump administration, with Israel, escalated its attacks on Iran.  Forced to the forefront of a war they did not want, Gulf rulers have learned that they are expendable in the eyes of Tel Aviv and Washington.

The disparity between the vast economic wealth of the Gulf states and their limited political agency is largely a legacy of their historical evolution.

The modern oil-rich monarchies of the Persian Gulf evolved from ancient maritime trading hubs and tribal confederations.  Until the late 20th century, the Gulf states, except Saudi Arabia, existed as British protectorates and their boundaries were primarily shaped by colonial officials.

Most of the current ruling families are descendants of leaders maintained in power by the British during their 150-year domination of the Gulf (1820-1971).

To support its strategic interests, primarily in India, Britain legitimized existing hereditary leaders and installed local hand-picked rulers that were willing to accept British authority. Those who refused “supervision” risked being deposed and replaced with a more compliant family member.

Interestingly, Britain’s hegemony over the Gulf began in 1820 over its refusal to pay tolls to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.  At that time, the powerful Qawasim maritime tribe (the Al-Qasimi family) controlled the waters of the Gulf and levied tolls on all trade that passed through the strait.  The British refusal led to confrontations between the two sides and the destruction of the entire Qawasim fleet.

Today, the descendants of the Al-Qasimi family, continue to rule two Emirates (Ras El Khaimah and Sharjah).

If the Gulf monarchs survive the war, their populations may—for the first time since both world wars—decide their futures free of tyrants, profligate sheiks and foreign domination. They can look to their own history, traditions and cultural heritage instead of relying on and mimicking the West, building one more alien useless skyscraper, sponsoring LIV golf tournaments and drag racing in the desert.

For nearly five decades, Zionist regimes have focused on a strategic goal: the election of a U.S. president compliant enough to wage war against Iran on their behalf.  They found their cat’s-paw in the current occupant of the Oval Office, Donald J. Trump.

Born at the barrel of a gun, Israel secures its place in the region by fostering chaos and conflict.  By deliberately sowing inter-Arab and Iranian-Arab division, it has reaped enormous profits through a booming arms and intelligence industry.  And by keeping its neighbors at odds and concentrated on Iran, it ensures no unified front arises that can challenge its existence.

The war on Iran has forced evolution, if not a revolution, upon West Asia. This shift could alter the geopolitics of the region, triggering U.S. independence from Israel and enabling regional transformation free from U.S. and Israeli domination.

With these stirring words, “The blood of the slain, the weeping voice of nature cries, TIS TIME TO PART,” Thomas Paine (Common Sense) called on the American colonies to sever ties and declare independence from Britain.  His call for a complete break from imperial power in 1776 is more timely than ever.

For America and the Arab states, severing ties with Israel is the only sensible path to take in order to finally end the chronic destructive cycle the region has known since Israel was forced upon it.  Yet, owing to Washington’s strategic myopia and Arab leaders’ historical deference, it is doubtful that they will make such a fundamental and necessary shift in regional politics.

Although our days are filled with grief and uncertainty because of yet another U.S.-sponsored Israeli war against its neighbors, one thing, however, is certain there will never be peace in West Asia until there is justice and self-determination for the Palestinians.

Dr. M. Reza Behnam is a political scientist who specializes in comparative politics with a focus on West Asia.  

Negotiating With Bombs

John Feffer

 April 13, 2026

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Frank E. Petersen Jr. (DDG 121) fires a Tomahawk Land Attack Missile during operations in support of Operation Epic Fury, Feb. 28, 2026. Photo: U.S. Navy.

Before he became one of the great diplomats of the twentieth century, Henry Kissinger wrote his dissertation about the Austrian statesman Klemens von Metternich. Kissinger closely studied how European diplomats like Metternich constructed a new regional order after the defeat of Napoleon. Metternich was an early expert in the art of herding cats, with the felines being powerful European leaders.

Drawing on those insights during his stint as national security advisor under Richard Nixon, Kissinger famously orchestrated the U.S. détente with China and a raft of arms control treaties with the Soviet Union. He also introduced “shuttle diplomacy” in his successful efforts to reduce animosities in the Middle East. He shared a Nobel Peace Prize for his part in the negotiations to end the Vietnam War.

Kissinger was no peacenik. He was involved in any number of military interventions and morally indefensible actions, such as destabilizing Chile under socialist Salvador Allende and supporting Pakistan in its genocidal campaign against Bengalis. In the case of the Vietnam War, he was a key architect of the secret bombing campaign in Cambodia and Laos, an involvement that calls into question the legitimacy of his Nobel Peace Prize. He was both a master diplomat and a war criminal.

The United States has long operated in these two registers: deploying overwhelming military force and using its diplomatic skills to broker peace deals. The two strategies have often gone hand in hand, as they did with Kissinger.

But what was once a matter of some sophistication—if often wrapped in secret violence—has now simply become heavy-handed and transparently brutal. The Trump administration has touted a series of peace deals that, at least in their sheer quantity, rival the successes of Henry Kissinger. Examined more carefully, however, those deals are either premature, non-existent, or largely a function of showmanship. The “peace deal” in Gaza, for instance, was hastily assembled and poorly thought-through; it’s no wonder that it hasn’t gotten to its second stage.

At the same time, Trump and company have embarked on a series of military campaigns that have culminated in the current Operation Epic Fury against Iran. Here, too, Trump toggles back and forth between war and peace, sometimes in the same remarks to the press. He promises an end to the war, whether Iran agrees to a deal or not, and then threatens to blast “Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!”

Ophir Falk, foreign policy adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu, put the matter succinctly when answering a question from National Public Radio about whether the Israeli prime minister supported Trump’s peace overtures to Iran.

“We’re negotiating with bombs,” Falk said.

The utter absurdity of this statement didn’t give him pause or elicit any reaction from the NPR interviewer. In its way, though, the brief statement encapsulates the approach of both Netanyahu and Trump. They are not interested in diplomacy, even when they talk about the value of talks. Negotiations, which require time and a certain amount of delicacy, are a waste of energy.

They prefer to change facts on the ground through sheer force.

Israel has never claimed the mantle of master negotiator or nimble mediator. But the United States has long claimed to have the experience, the relationships, and the economic and military leverage to make deals. The United States has played key roles in resolving conflicts in Northern Ireland, in the former Yugoslavia, between Egypt and Israel, and so on.

Superficially, Trump promises to continue that tradition. He is, of course, the self-proclaimed master of the “art of the deal.”

The truth is, however, that Trump was never a great dealmaker. He was famous for ripping off his business partners. His career is littered with failed businesses like Trump Airlines, Trump University, and Trump Magazine. Many of his biggest deals—the West Side of Manhattan, Trump Tower Tampa—fell through. He famously endured six bankruptcies.

It’s not just that Trump’s diplomatic deals are similarly fake. Rather, he is threatening to put U.S. diplomacy as a whole into receivership.

After his decision to attack Iran in the middle of negotiations with the country – not just once but twice! – there is no good reason for any country to trust what U.S. diplomats say to them. Diplomacy, after all, is all about trust. In this way, Trump has squandered what remains of U.S. diplomatic capital.

Looking to the future, Trump has also eviscerated the cadre of diplomats that could bring about some return to the previous status quo. Last July, the administration fired 1,300 State Department workers, including nearly 250 foreign service officers. That included staffers focused on the Middle East who were responsible for working out scenarios if the Strait of Hormuz were closed. U.S. overseas aid has been effectively dismantled. The latest budget would reduce State Department and foreign operations by another 22 percent.

Alongside these reductions, Trump increased military spending to $1 trillion and has requested another 50 percent hike to $1.5 trillion. This is the fiscal equivalent of “negotiating with bombs.” After all the staff and budget cuts at the State Department, practically the only thing left that the United States possesses with which to do diplomacy are bombs.

The evisceration of U.S. diplomacy is not exactly a tragedy. U.S. diplomatic activities have always reflected naked self-interest. And other countries can certain step in as mediators: the European Union, China, Oman.

The tragedy lies elsewhere. As long as the United States is no longer pursuing real diplomatic options—in contrast to the Three Stooges method of conflict resolution where Trump bangs together the heads of the primary combatants—it will continue to rely on force as the first resort. Washington will talk in the future almost exclusively with bombs. It will be Kissinger without the diplomatic knowledge. It will be all sticks, no carrots.

Thanks to Trump, the United States has become a thug nation. The only remaining question is whether the rest of the world can somehow preserve the art of diplomacy—as Pakistan has done to avert the latest threats of escalation in the Iran War—and reverse the current trend of using bombs to negotiate.

John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy In Focus, where this article originally appeared.