From foes to allies
Philadelphia, the birthplace of America’s independence, is perhaps the most important place to reflect on how far the U.K. and the U.S. have come since 1776. As the British minister for North America, I’m struck by the memorials and museums across the City of Brotherly Love that demonstrate just how rocky our relationship once was.
But it’s the sense of distance we feel from that time that is truly remarkable. The 250th anniversary of American independence reminds us that our countries, once at odds, have since built the closest alliance between any two nations on earth. Today, the U.K. and the U.S. are firmly rooted in our shared values, history, and purpose.
My own family heritage reflects this deep and abiding bond: My American grandfather, a decorated veteran from the Bronx, fought in the liberation of Europe from the Nazis on the same side as my British grandfather, who fought alongside American servicemen as part of the Allied forces in World War II. My two grandfathers never met — yet they stood on the same side in the fight for freedom. Their parallel service mirrors the paths our nations have taken.
Today, our partnership matters more than ever because we face a world defined by new threats. No two allies integrate their military, intelligence, and security capabilities more deeply than the U.K. and the U.S. British Ministry of Defence personnel serve across the United States — including at Carlisle Barracks here in Pennsylvania — ensuring our armed forces can work seamlessly together.
As King Charles III said, while our bond was “forged in the fire of conflict,” it is strengthened by the shared endeavor and mutual affection of today.
This year, we celebrate 250 years of American independence on both sides of the Atlantic, because the U.K.-U.S. relationship stands as one of the world’s great success stories.
Our alliance endures because generations of our people understand the lesson that even though, like any family, we occasionally have differences, when the U.K. and the U.S. stand together, we solve the world’s greatest challenges and defeat our greatest enemies.
Stephen Doughty, British minister of state for North America and Europe, and member of Parliament
Row offices
The Inquirer Editorial Board makes a compelling argument for eliminating the register of wills and other row offices. The question is, how do the voters “demand change”?
City Council can do this by proposing a charter change to be voted on by the people in a general election. To get this question on the ballot, a majority of City Council must agree. Former Mayor Michael Nutter tried, but Council wouldn’t go along with him.
The only way the voters can demand change is to elect city officials who would support the elimination of row offices. The Inquirer has a role to play in this regard. When vetting candidates for local office, the Editorial Board must ask — and publish — where they stand on the question of abolishing row offices. If no one questions the candidates and puts them on the record, voters have no way to demand change by electing those who support the change.
Tom Elsasser, Chestnut Hill, elsasser64@aol.com
Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.