King Charles should follow the Dutch king's example and formally apologise for Britain's and his family's role in slavery
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/raoul-de-jong. "Memo to King Charles: if the Dutch king can apologise for slavery, why can’t you? | Raoul de Jong | The Guardian." November 2, 2026. www.theguardian.com
The Gist
The author says that if the Dutch king could formally apologise for slavery and his family's part in it, King Charles can too. He argues the apology matters both to descendants of the enslaved and to wider society, which needs to learn the truth. Offering only 'sorrow' lets politicians avoid the issue and leaves Charles on the wrong side of history.
Conclusion
King Charles should use his Caribbean tour to issue a formal apology for Britain's role in the transatlantic slave trade and his own family's part in it, as King Willem-Alexander did for the Netherlands, rather than merely expressing 'sorrow'.
Premises
- King Willem-Alexander formally apologised in 2023 for the Dutch state's role in slavery and for the House of Orange-Nassau's failure to act against it, showing that a European monarch can do this.
- A formal apology matters to descendants of the enslaved, who and whose ancestors fought for centuries, often at great personal risk, to obtain such recognition.
- An apology is perhaps even more important for the wider population, especially white citizens who see this history as unrelated to them and have not considered what they can learn from the descendants of the enslaved.
- Many of Charles's subjects do not know the true history of slavery, and a royal apology would help bring that truth into public awareness.
- A mere expression of 'sorrow' falls short of an apology and gives politicians cover to dodge the question of an apology.
- Charles has a choice between standing in the way of historical truth and standing with it, and history will remember him accordingly.
Assumptions
- A formal apology from a head of state has symbolic and educational power beyond a statement of sorrow or regret.
- A monarch can meaningfully apologise for the actions of the state and of his own family's predecessors, even though he did not commit them.
- The Dutch and British situations are sufficiently analogous that the Dutch precedent creates a reasonable expectation for Charles.
- Constitutional constraints on the monarch (such as acting on government advice) do not make an apology impossible or inappropriate.
- A royal apology would shift public understanding and not simply be symbolic or politically divisive.
- Legacy and how history judges him are considerations that should motivate Charles.