Editor’s note: This article was published prior to the reports of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest on the morning of 19 February.
Not for the first time, an American is threatening the overthrow of the British monarchy. Ro Khanna, a Democratic congressman for California, was one of the main architects of the law that made the Trump administration release the Epstein files. Previously Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager in 2020, Khanna sits in the Democrats’ progressive wing and will likely run for the presidential nomination in 2028. But until then, these last few weeks have marked one of his most high-profile international interventions. He has been calling for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to testify before Congress, and has said that King Charles and Queen Camilla have questions to answer on the scandal. “Maybe this will be the end of the monarchy,” he said.
When I spoke to Khanna recently, he went further. He said that the scandal has revealed “a group of people who think they’re above the law, who think that they have some divine right to be better than the rest of us, and that is not the democratic society we live in… In a future presidency, for the sake of the British-American relationship, the British government should give [Andrew] up.” That is a warning: No 10’s troubles would remain in a Democratic administration if Khanna was involved.
Khanna’s criticism is not levelled at the British people in general. In fact, he said he found the “moral clarity” in British society’s response to the Epstein class “inspiring”. “The British have taken this scandal more seriously than we have,” he said. “There is an appreciation in America, among the survivors, me and others in Congress for how the British people are handling this.”
But for Khanna this scandal (and the royal family) is personal. Amarnath Vidyalankar, Khanna’s maternal grandfather, was imprisoned in India for supporting civil disobedience during Gandhi’s campaign for Indian independence from the British empire. It’s ironic that Khanna’s work in Congress has ushered in a crisis for the British monarchy. His grandfather spoke little about the monarchy but would recount how profound it was for him to visit the UK parliament after Indian independence. He never would have dreamed, Khanna said, that the British monarchy would be reacting to his grandson’s work in Congress.
Khanna’s campaign, and the rhetoric behind it, reveals an attitude towards Britain different to the – occasionally hysterical – welcome that the royals have come to expect. In fact, what they’re really used to is Americans like Donald Trump.
The president is mesmerised by the Windsors’ baubles. Trump was already sympathetic to the royal family; he seemed genuinely moved last February when he was invited for a state visit. And Trump’s embroilment in the Epstein scandal seems to have generated sympathy towards those who share its taint. He had off-brand, warm words for Bill Clinton after the former president was forced to agree to testify in front of Congress later this month. Trump has even said he felt “very badly” about Andrew losing his aristocratic titles.
But soft words and diplomatic gestures are the last gasps of a special relationship. The Epstein scandal is both our era’s defining tale of corruption and abuse, as well as the epitome of this relationship. Consider a scenario in which an insecure leader leverages the symbolic value of the House of Windsor to access levels of American wealth and intelligence that their country no longer provides. Am I talking about a state visit or Andrew pleading with Epstein for financial guidance?
The Epstein scandal reveals a lot more about Britain’s connections with the US than has so far been acknowledged. The royal family risks becoming, in the minds of Middle America, just another sub-branch of a remote, criminal elite. Of course, those Americans with a residual, fawning affection for the Windsors will find Andrew’s collaboration with Epstein singular to him, a bad smell to be ignored. But much of America view the monarchy as, at best, a medieval relic and, at worst, an affront to the founding republican ideals of the United States. The Windsors – and any government that tries to cash in on their mystique – are now unforgivably spoiled.
That royals are wheeled out to compensate for the UK’s lack of hard power is, to these republican minds, a sign of impotence. If Britain didn’t rely so much on foreign money, then perhaps it wouldn’t need to lean so much on the royals to win over foreign governments. Further still, in those same American minds, the Windsors are not entirely free from being associated with the British empire. Prince William might not know much about the Bengal famine or the Tasmania genocide, but that doesn’t mean the world has forgotten they occurred under the rule of his ancestors.
For a sense of this new attitude, listen to Khanna. Britain, he thinks, should not try to influence others through “the past glory of illegitimate colonialism or a tradition of monarchy”, but from “a moral sentiment of taking on elite impunity, believing in the rule of law and philosophers such as Locke”. That might be the moral course of action, though it is another thing to argue in the Trump era that such a path would allow Britain to enjoy real influence. We might not have a choice though. If more Americans associate the Windsors with Epstein, their value as diplomats will fall even further, and a new foundation for the special relationship – which looks more precarious by the day – would have to be found. The lesson for the royals, and Britain, is simple enough though: you’re not special any more.
[Further reading: There is no working class party]
Content from our partners
Related
This article appears in the 18 Feb 2026 issue of the New Statesman, Class warrior
Join the debate
Subscribe here to comment