Don't get too comfortable in Blighty, Americans

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (Image: Page Six)

I have never been to the United States, but there is a part of me that wants to go tomorrow. I'd love to experience Miami beaches, bask in the Hollywood ambience and visit Seattle simply down to the fact Frasier was based there. There is a general fascination towards its glitz and glamour and intrigue towards its politics because it is overstated, dramatic and bigger than any Coronation Street plot. There is a part of us that craves Americanism to settle in Britain, but at any opportunity that this happens, we cannot wait to get rid of it.

In politics, regardless of a US Presidents' popularity, we often got annoyed by their presence in the UK. Whether it was George W. Bush with Tony Blair and commentators crying foul of their reliance of each other during in the Middle East conflict. Or whether it was Barack Obama and David Cameron with their chummy appearances during state visits and his apparent interference during the EU referendum. Or whether it is Donald Trump being, well, Donald Trump, it is often America that gets the brunt of negative publicity.

In addition to this, the Americanisation of politics is often blamed for how recent elections in Britain are conducted. I don't imagine that BBC, ITV or Sky would fight over airing TV debates during election season as they have been, had it not been for its popularity across the pond. The public aren't a great fan of these as commentators in recent years have called them 'strange' or a 'constitutional abomination'.

Despite the British public annoyance towards US politics, it is politicians in Westminster that strives for that so-called 'special relationship' their constituents don't really care about. Particularly with Donald Trump as President, thousands of Britons protest whenever he sets foot on British soil, and his antics on Twitter unite British social media users with angst. Yet, it is him and the States that MPs wholly rely upon when it comes to anything foreign. We will see their relationship under the microscope throughout this year as it'll be seen whether a half decent trade deal is struck between the two nations. Elsewhere, UK government officials are being mere spectators when it comes to how Trump handles the current Middle East conflict.

Donald Trump at a Republican rally (Image: AP News)

It is hard not to avoid the news surrounding Iran. When its military commander Qasem Soleimani was assassinated by US forces, the global community waited in anticipated horror as to the next steps, which later appeared to be hot air as Iran's 'slap in the face' to America was an attack to its base in Iraq. There were no casualties. Where there were casualties, however, was just hours later when a passenger aircraft was 'unintentionally' gunned down by Iranian forces, having mistaken it with something more sinister.

You'd like to think that the response from Prime Minister Boris Johnson is practically the same as his public - everyone, drop all your weapons; choose diplomacy over conflict; both US and Iran need a bit of a shake and not to emulate scenes from Michael Douglas 1989 hit film 'The War of the Roses'. Instead, we have whispers of calls for the Middle East to de-escalate the situation. It has to take Justin Trudeau of Canada to truly take the lead for this call. You can sense however that Johnson wishes to keep things sweet with the States, presumably largely due to wanting favourable trade talks post-Brexit to go as planned. He knows Trump can easily tweet anything anti-Britain, should any criticism head from Downing Street to the White House, setting back any chances of prioritising UK trade deal talks. Johnson is already treading on muddy water.

I'll move away from politics for one moment and head to the drama at the other part of Westminster - Buckingham Palace. A big bombshell landed in the Royal Family as Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle announced their intention to step back from 'senior' royal duties. Life circumstances has taken them to a different direction and they have set out plans to embark on their 'independent' journey, immigrate to Canada and life live how they choose.

The reaction has been overwhelmingly unflattering towards the couple. There are a host of arguments out there, ranging from 'good on you, Harry and Meghan' to 'it's all manipulative Meghan's fault', the latter of which is arguably shouted the loudest. My view is for the former and can completely understand why both have made this decision, and I am surprised Harry in particular did make it earlier. My views on Prince William in 2016 should have probably been aimed towards Harry.

Harry has had a tough journey as a Royal. He couldn't be a child mourning for his mother's passing in quiet, he couldn't be a rebellious young adult partying hard in Las Vegas (regardless of its controversy) and he couldn't embrace helping the armed forces and become the nation's sweetheart on his own terms as a result. He cannot feel the need to have a private life or potentially hold passionate views that go against the protocols set by your boss, i.e., the Queen, a.k.a., your grandmother. By stepping down, he can have his chance to show the real Henry, his birth name if you hadn't noticed.

UK papers react to 'Megxit' (Image: Metro)

Meghan on the other hand has had a very difficult ride since being Harry's significant other. It started well because royal commentators really wanted Harry to be besotted and marry and Meghan was the 'chosen one'. But since their wedding, things went swiftly downhill. Rumours of tensions among brothers (Harry with Prince William) and their wives were rife and it seemed to be confirmed when Harry and Meghan were interviewed for ITV during their Africa tour when the couple hinted of isolation from the other members of his family.

Things never recovered from that point. Those rumours went straight back to Meghan because apparently, it is all her fault. Because she's estranged from members of her family, Harry is having a tiff with his brother. Commentators put him being unsettled down to her too. He doesn't want to be on the front line because of her. He is 'woke' because of her, the 'Prince of Woke', says the Daily Mail. He is anti-establishment because of her. It's all absolutely nonsense. Remember, they want to 'step back from senior royal duties', not 'step down from being royal' - they are very different concepts.

Pro-Meghan supporters can claim those who don't like her - namely the press and the Royal Family - is because of her race. I don't think it's that. I think it's because she is American. She has the glitz, she has the glamour, she holds strong opinions, and she has that flamboyance - everything that very few in the UK are used to, or want to get used to. Of course, there are concerns around how Harry and Meghan distance themselves from the Royal Family, and what they are entitled to. However, regardless of what happens, why can't we be pleased for them?

Meghan Markle and Donald Trump have polar opposite outlooks on life, but have that one thing in common that people in Britain just don't like - they're American. It doesn't matter what they do. We can idolise them from afar, though that's where it ends. Author Will Self puts it rather perfectly in his BBC article in 2012. The matter of fact remains the same to this day, that infamous British stiff upper lip is here to stay.