A recent report published by The Guardian claims that Donald Trump has postponed a state visit to Britain over fears of protests, and adds that Trump does not wish to visit until ‘Brits support him coming’. Yet subsequent reports from CNN claim that a senior US administration official has dismissed this story entirely. So, what is the truth?
The Guardian reportstated that in a phone call Between Trump and Theresa May, Trump said that he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public support him coming. The story claims that the US president does not want to come if there are large-scale protests and until such a time that he feels he will be welcomed, that he will put a state visit on hold.
The apparent phone call was witnessed by a Downing Street advisor and, if true, explains in part why there has been little public discussion recently regarding a state visit from Trump.
However, a report from CNN refutes this story and claims that whilst acknowledging how he may never be popular in London, that the president isn’t ‘fazed by that’. White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said that Trump ‘has tremendous respect for Prime Minister May’ and added that ‘the subject never came up on the call.’ The president’s press secretary Sean Spicer also reportedly dismissed this story and claimed that the information in the Guardian article was false.
No official date was ever set for the state visit and a Downing Street spokesperson has since refused to comment on, what he called, ‘speculation about contents of a private phone conversation’.
May first extended an invitation, on behalf of the Queen, for Trump to visit the UK only a week after his inauguration, something which was heavily criticised by the British public and resulted in an online petition which gathered over 1.8 million signatures. The petition was formally rejected by the British government, however, it was an indication of the dissatisfaction felt by many Britons regarding Trump’s presidency and his political standpoint on many controversial topics including public healthcare.
More recently there was another call to cancel any state visits after Trump publicly criticised London Mayor, Sadiq Khan’s, response to the tragic London Bridge terror attack. Khan himself said that it would be ‘inappropriate for us to be rolling out the red carpet’ for Trump after this behaviour and this opinion was mirrored online where many people on Twitter supported Khan’s view.
Whether or not these claims are true, and Trump is postponing any state visits due to fear or protests, this story highlights how powerful protesting can be, especially when protesting someone with a famously thin skin and a huge ego. If the notion of disruption and the visual demonstration of his overwhelming unpopularity is enough to scare off Trump, then surely increasing public outrage will have a direct effect on any future visits that he may be planning.
It’s understandable why so many people may question the efficacy of protesting as it’s rare that we see such a direct correlation between public protest and real world response. Each protest speaks directly to the strength of conviction of opinion, and each protest raises the stakes in what the public expects and demands from their government. Usually, the timeline between protest and reaction can take a long time. But now with the aid of social media, we can witness just how quickly and efficiently these protests can be organised and executed. Also, these online communities can help maintain stamina over a long period of time and continue public interest in a cause.
The British public have made it increasingly clear that a large number of people do not welcome Trump or support his politics, and news stories such as this show how protesting can expose the gaps in Trump's armour, even if it just results in him being more reluctant to plan a state visit.
You might also be interested in...
Follow Tara on Twitter @TaraPilks
This article originally appeared on The Debrief.