Online petitions calling for King Charles III to cancel or reconsider a future visit to the United States have attracted thousands of signatures after Donald Trump faced backlash in Britain for comments about UK and other Nato troops’ role in Afghanistan.
The petitions, hosted on platforms including Change.org, argue that a high-profile royal visit would be inappropriate following remarks that many military families and veterans’ advocates view as dismissive of allied sacrifices during the two-decade war. Several separate petitions have been launched, rather than a single campaign, and the signature totals are spread across multiple pages.
You can sign one of them here.
The controversy began after Trump, speaking in an interview with Fox Business presenter Maria Bartiromo, suggested that Nato allies “sent some troops” to Afghanistan but “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines”. The comments prompted a swift political response in the UK, where senior figures pointed to the number of British personnel killed during the conflict and the frontline role UK forces played in provinces including Helmand.
What Trump said, and why it struck a nerve in Britain
Trump’s remarks were framed as part of a broader argument about burden-sharing within Nato and whether European allies would defend the United States if it was attacked. But in the UK, attention quickly focused on the Afghanistan comments, which were widely interpreted as questioning the reality of British and allied combat contributions.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the comments as “insulting” and “appalling”, and stressed the losses suffered by British forces during the war. Reporting by Reuters said Starmer raised the issue directly with Trump during a call, underlining the shared sacrifice between allies.
The political reaction matters here because it illustrates why some petition organisers believe the issue has moved beyond a typical diplomatic spat. Their argument is that the symbolism of a royal visit, particularly one involving ceremonial events and public-facing warmth, risks being seen as brushing aside remarks that touched on a sensitive national subject.
The petitions: what they claim, and what they do not prove
Several petitions call on the King to “cancel” or “reconsider” a proposed or expected US trip, typically described as a state visit. Petition text shared on Change.org frames the call as a matter of respect for service personnel and bereaved families, and urges the Palace and government to avoid what organisers see as diplomatic normalisation without accountability.
Some signers have left personal comments describing their connection to the armed forces. One wrote: “My three sons were in the army, fought in Afghanistan. I am absolutely disgusted with what Trump said.” Others argue that, in their view, Trump’s remarks show he is not acting as a reliable ally.
At the same time, it is important to be clear about what online petitions can and cannot show. Petition platforms capture motivated participation, not representative sampling, and totals can rise quickly when a story trends. Even so, the number and speed of petitions provides a snapshot of how strongly some people feel, especially among those engaged with defence politics and the monarchy’s public role.
Trump’s response: praise for UK troops after condemnation
After the backlash, Reuters reported that Trump posted praise for British soldiers on Truth Social, describing them as “brave warriors” and emphasising the bond between the United States and the UK. The post followed widespread condemnation of his original remarks and did not amount to a full retraction of what he said in the interview.
This distinction is central to why the petitions have not simply disappeared. For critics, a later statement praising UK troops is not the same as acknowledging the specific claim that allies stayed away from the most dangerous fighting. Supporters of Trump’s position, meanwhile, have tended to frame his comments as a critique of alliance structures rather than an attack on individual soldiers.
The wider context: Afghanistan, Nato, and the memory of war
Afghanistan remains a politically and emotionally charged subject in Britain. The war lasted two decades, involved multiple phases of combat operations and nation-building, and is associated with complex questions about strategy, outcomes, and the risks borne by service personnel.
The UK’s losses are frequently cited in debates about alliance solidarity. The figure of 457 British service members killed in Afghanistan has been widely referenced in recent coverage and political responses to Trump’s comments.
It is also relevant that Nato’s collective defence clause, Article 5, was invoked after the 11 September attacks – the only time it has been triggered – which is part of why allied involvement is often framed in Britain as a direct act of solidarity with the United States.
Would the King actually be able to “cancel” a visit?
Even if petition totals continue to rise, a royal visit of this kind is not simply a personal diary event that can be cancelled unilaterally. State visits sit at the intersection of the monarchy and elected government. They are typically arranged through diplomatic channels and are designed to serve strategic and ceremonial purposes that go beyond any single political controversy.
That does not mean plans cannot change. Visits can be delayed, scaled down, reframed, or replaced with different forms of engagement. But any change would likely be presented as a diplomatic decision rather than a response to domestic political pressure, because the monarchy is expected to remain above day-to-day politics.
For petition organisers, however, the aim is less about process and more about message. Their central claim is that Britain should not proceed with high-profile symbolism while the issue remains unresolved in the public mind. Whether that argument gains traction in Westminster is likely to depend on whether the row continues, whether further comments are made, and whether UK ministers believe the public response poses a real political risk.
What happens next
In practical terms, the next steps are likely to be incremental rather than dramatic. Petition campaigns may continue to grow, but they may also splinter across multiple pages. Political pressure could intensify if more senior UK figures join calls for a clearer apology, or if veterans’ groups escalate their public response.
For the Palace, the key question is reputational management: how to maintain the monarchy’s diplomatic role without appearing indifferent to a controversy involving military sacrifice. For government, the calculation is strategic: balancing public sentiment at home with the long-term reality that the US remains Britain’s most important bilateral ally.
For now, the petitions represent a growing, visible expression of anger, even if they do not, by themselves, determine whether any visit goes ahead.
15 responses to “Petitions urge King Charles to rethink US visit after Trump remarks”
-
The King should never have been instructed to meet Trump – whether in the UK or in the US. Even Starmer must have realised by now that appeasing this bully and feeding his ego is in nobody’s interest. Moreover, the King deserves more respect.
-
King Charles should NOT visit the US. He “stripped “ his brother Andrew because of accusations that he was friends with Epstein and attended his “parties”and Trump and Melanie were also friends. I believe many years ago at the height of Trumps friendship with Epstein , Trump bragged about being friends for 15 years. Going to US would be like accepting that Trump and Melania’s friendship with Epstein are OK but not his brother.
Secondly, Insulting Britain about them not contributing to the war in Afghanistan while many British soldiers along with Canadians and other NATO countries LOST THEIR LIVES.
Thirdly, Capturing Venezuelas president Maduro and his wife was not for the betterment of the people of Venezuela but strictly to enrich his pockets with their oil wealth and to boast. He ( Trump) himself is a dictator. He’s just lining his pockets and doesn’t give a damn about the many US people that are struggling.
Fourth, Without any proof of drugs , Trump ORDERED his military to sink vessels in the Caribbean which killed dozens of people. That is MURDER, and he’s getting away with it.
So, in conclusion , by visiting the US it would be like King Charles approves of Trumps criminal actions. -
If the King and the Government allow this visit to proceed my estimation of the King and the UK as a whole will reach an all time low
-
-
Stop Trump at all costs denie America all until they can become adults. Show the world that until Trump is removed we the people will not engage, holiday, alliey in conflict, import, or export.
-
The King attending shows support to the Trump regime and the behaviours that are being demonstrated in the USA. Opening and filling Concentration camps, killing citizens, deporting legal citizens, torture, child trafficking and rape, kidnapping, extortion, breaching the rule of law…… He just can’t go plusTrump insulted the armed forces es of the UK.
-
I’m sorry … I can’t conceive of any benefit to ANYONE that might derive from such a visit.
except bolstering Trump’s lunacy, and it would be seriously demeaning to The King.
THERE CAN BE NO VALID UPSIDE!! -
Trump is disrespectful, rude, ignorant, and worst of all a narcissistic despot, if Charles III represents Great Britain then he should abstain from the visit and visit Canada.
-
It wasnt only US troops that went to Afghanistan and paid the price for the services they paid for their country. Many families were left devastated and discussed at what he said.
-
Trump has dis honoured Britain by his comments about British troops in Afghanistan and mocked our loyalty.
-
It is absolutely disgusting the comments made by a person in such high position. Our brave solders gave their lives and some had life changing injuries they deserve all the respect.
I believe our Majesty King Charles lll should consider visiting such a vile individual. This man has no respect in his own and the rest of the world. -
As an ex Royal Marine, the King should tell Trump that he’s going to visit the future power across the pond and dine with Carney.
-
-
-
King Charles is non-political but is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Services! He should not be in the company of this bigoted, racist, misogynistic dictator.
Related: Thornberry blasts Trump over Afghanistan front line remark
Leave a Reply