King Charles Can Save the Falkland Islands  

British control of the Falkland Islands, which the United States helped the Brits reconquer in the 1982 Falklands War, now seems to be at risk. There are news reports that the Trump administration's list of ways to punish recalcitrant NATO allies includes siding with Argentina over control of the Falklands.

London’s Express reported that

Donald Trump's Pentagon officials are exploring ways the United States can punish NATO countries for failing to support the Iran war, including by reportedly reviewing Britain's claim to the Falkland Islands. . . . An option included in the message is to consider reassessing US diplomatic support for European “imperial possessions”, such as the Falkland Islands. The archipelago in the South Atlantic is a self-governing British Overseas Territory which has long been claimed by Argentina.

In April 1982, Argentina invaded the islands and quickly took control. But in a ten-week war, the U.K. won them back, sending a naval task force that performed an amphibious assault. In June 1982, Argentine forces surrendered. The British had full American support in this war, which included the U.S. providing missiles, fuel, and intelligence to the Royal Navy. Why the full American backing? For one thing, by 1982 President Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher had established a close personal and political alliance. For another, Britain was a model democracy, while Argentina was ruled by a vicious military junta that had killed or “disappeared” between 10,000 and 30,000 of its own citizens. Who would want the Brits on the Falkland Islands to lose their freedom to Argentine thugs?

But today, President Trump has a much closer relationship, politically and personally, with Argentine President Javier Milei than with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and Argentina is a democracy. So the Falklands — or as the Argentines call them, the Malvinas Islands — may be on the chopping block.

What can the British do? Use the king’s visit this week — and arm him with a truly powerful justification that will persuade Donald Trump.

On the personal side, Trump clearly loves the royal family and has said how much he appreciates the king. He has called Charles “a fantastic man” and “a great man.” Surely someone will tell Trump that siding with Argentina over the Falklands would be a tremendous blow to his relationship with the king and to the king’s own popularity at home.

But the king needs more than charm; he needs an argument.

And it’s simple. Either the United States thinks the U.K. can and should keep its “imperial possessions,” or we don’t — and if we don’t, there go the Chagos Islands and the indispensable U.S. military base at Diego Garcia that Trump has strongly demanded that the U.K. keep.

The Chagos Islands were conquered by France in 1714 and ceded by France to the U.K. in 1814. The atolls, which include Diego Garcia, are now a “British Indian Ocean Territory." The Falklands are a “British Overseas Territory.” Believed to have been uninhabited before European discovery in the 17th century, the islands changed hands among various powers until the British finally took control in 1833.

So the king should remind the president of his own argument about Diego Garcia. In January, Trump called the British decision to turn the Chagos Islands over to Mauritius "an act of great stupidity" and an “act of total weakness.” Trump called the Mauritius deal “a blight on our Great Ally” and posted on Truth Social, “DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA!”

Cue His Majesty. Good arguments — and the same goes for the Falklands: No giveaways and “No acts of total weakness and great stupidity.” Weakening British control of “imperial possessions” in the South Atlantic will weaken it everywhere, including the Pacific.

And the king can add that in a 2013 sovereignty referendum, 99.8 percent of the voters were in favor of remaining a British overseas territory. Falkland Islanders are British citizens — like Trump’s late mother. Does Trump really want to turn them into Argentines against their will?

State visits like that of the king and queen this week are supposed to be ceremonial, but the king can win one for the home team here — and for better U.S.-U.K. relations.