Joe Biden is not attending King Charles III’s coronation, instead sending First Lady Jill Biden on his behalf. I’m not clear on the reasons – perhaps his schedule is already full, perhaps he considers it beneath him, perhaps the optics are bad, perhaps he dislikes Charles because reasons. He did, however, attend Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, so there’s that.
CNN noted that the U.S. POTUS (would have been Eisenhower at the time) did not attend QEII’s coronation, and indeed, no POTUS has ever attended one. I can see why: the Special Relationship didn’t really come into vogue until after WWII, and by that time George VI was already on the throne.
I don’t have any specific questions related to this matter. I’m just kind of baffled at the whole thing. It seems like it’s kind of a snub, but perhaps I’m misinterpreting things. Especially in light of the fact that Biden attended the Queen’s funeral. So I guess my questions are, a) why is Biden skipping and b) do you consider this a bad thing?
Joe has been invited for a state visit to the UK as part of a recent phone call with Chuck. I don’t think is considered insulting, but more a matter of tradition.
Does the president routinely attend inaugural festivities of foreign heads of state? I’m not saying it never happens, but I can’t think of any examples.
Heads of state rarely traveled that far back then. There was no presidential travel abroad from 1947-1953 at all. And in any case, heads of state weren’t invited to previous coronations. The idea that the US president would be invited, let alone that it would be a ginned-up controversy that he isn’t going, is new to 2023.
I don’t think Biden deciding not to attend is a snub. All of the heads of non-Commonwealth states would be very much sat near the back and would be very much in the background. The only reason he might have to attend is to perhaps meet other leaders for a sort of unofficial summit (which is unlikely to happen) and for a photo op for maybe the US papers. The UK will not be too bothered by this so it’s no insult.
Yeah, I kind of like the optics of Biden’s non-attendance at the coronation, actually.
Go to the funeral of the former monarch to pay your respects to the beloved long-reigning head of state of a valued ally, sure. Skip the formal installation ceremony of the new monarch, because that’s basically a dog-and-pony show for the subjects of the monarchy. From the US’s point of view as a separate sovereign nation, Charles III has been the UK’s head of state since the death of Elizabeth II, as specified in the British constitution. That’s the only personnel update we need to officially take note of.
The US President doesn’t need to schlep over to London just to watch an archbishop plop a crown on some royal offspring’s head. We fought a war to get shut of this notion that headship of state should automatically be determined by whose offspring you are.* People who still like to run their countries that way are perfectly free to do so, of course, but we shouldn’t encourage them by sending our own head of state to swell the audience for their hereditary-privilege spectacle.
(Paradoxically, I think it’s perfectly fine and a graceful gesture to send our unelected First Lady to the event, as a testament to friendly relations and goodwill. Diplomacy is a complicated and frequently contradictory thing.)
* Obligatory acknowledgement of the many and various political issues underlying the American Revolution; of course, in reality it was nowhere near as simple as colonists declaring that they refused to be ruled by a hereditary monarch purely as a matter of republican principle.
Yeah, that’s exactly the aspect I don’t think Americans should be encouraging. “Hey bro, congratulations to your reigning dynasty from our reigning dynasty” is not an appropriate message to send on behalf of the USA. (Though I readily admit that our own power structures have a strong tendency to be more hereditary than is consistent with our official principles.)
The surprise is not that Biden is not attending. No one expected that he would. No, the surprise is that a few foreign heads of state have said that they will attend, including the Kings of Sweden and Spain. That’s a break with tradition. But so far the only Presidents who have said they’ll be there are very minor ones (Poland, the Philippines etc.). The expectation was always that most countries would send lesser representatives.
Huh, I’m a bit surprised to hear that that’s surprising. I kind of assumed that all these guys are cousins anyway so naturally they all go to one another’s weddings and funerals and commencements, so to speak.
To be fair, AFAICT, we never invite them. You need an invitation to be one of the 3000 or so people who fit on the Inaugural Platform and West Terrace bleachers, and I think it would not be considered a good look to include a UK king or queen as a symbolic mommy or daddy figure endorsing the event. Besides, there are always at least 3000 more US-Presidency-relevant people to issue invitations to.
Natch, an English king or queen is perfectly welcome to squash in with the rest of the public on the National Mall, but of course they never would.
Huh again. Is the idea to basically keep the potential targets separated, so that some anarchist greedy and lank can’t take out most of the crowned heads of Europe with one of Sister Jenny’s bombs?
Yeah, considering they’re all benefiting from the same scam, you’d think they would support each other more in making it look like the right thing to do.
My first thought was if it had anything to do with the conflict between Britain and the USA over re-establishing the British Empire. Churchill wanted to regain control of these ares, and FDR wanted the people to vote in their own government.
In America’s defense, it would have been extremely awkward the first few times we did an inauguration. I mean, we weren’t exactly on good terms clear through 1812. And then their textile industry took such a liking to secessionist cotton…
I’m just saying that by the time it got to a point where this might have even been a consideration, a precedent had long been set.