Column: Mike Johnson’s strong Parliament speech overshadowed

President Donald Trump threatens to annex Greenland, launches new tariffs against the eight NATO allies who sent troops there in response, ominously threatens even more drastic moves, then calls off the show.

Rack up another major public relations success for the current head of the U.S. government, whose greatest priority is not territorial expansion or traditional international influence, but rather media attention.

The media are his violin, and he plays them as a virtuoso.

Meanwhile, Speaker Mike Johnson of the United States House of Representatives delivered a virtuoso speech to Britain’s Parliament on Jan. 22. Johnson addressed the British legislators the day after Trump backed off from his Great Greenland Grab in a speech at Davos, Switzerland, during a gathering of bigwigs and big egos from around the world.

The Parliament session included both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Johnson was the first U.S. House speaker to address his counterparts in our sister nation and delivered a brilliant address, remarkably insightful, historically rich and interesting.

The U.S. media characteristically focused on Trump. The British media have been notably critical, and also emotional. Family life can be tough.

Johnson was in London as part of recognizing and honoring the 250th anniversary of the independence of the United States. While July 4 is not a holiday in the United Kingdom, the long history of friendship as well as alliance between our two nations has removed any lingering friction from the successful efforts of colonials across the Atlantic to break away from the mother country.

Johnson skillfully, articulately described the profound manner in which Britain’s rule of law and evolving emphasis on individual freedom inform America, then and now.

“The Special Relationship” is how our close, at times vital, partnership is titled. Speaker Johnson knowledgeably emphasized that, along with describing the elements and importance of our partnership.

Our modern partnership was initially formalized and announced by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill during the darkest days of World War II. The two leaders met on navy vessels off the coast of Newfoundland in August 1941.

This first in a series of summits resulted in the Atlantic Charter, defining broad positive human goals of freedom and basic economic security. A follow-up session resulted in commitment to the concept of the United Nations, which, moving forward, signified the Allies’ goals in World War II.

During the mid-1960s, President Lyndon Johnson’s administration pressed extremely hard for at least token direct military participation in the Vietnam War. Australia and New Zealand, both members of the British Commonwealth, did provide forces. In the case of Australia, there was considerably more than a token commitment.

Britain remained out of that war.

Prime Minister Tony Blair paid a high political price for his faithful support of the administration of George W. Bush in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Yet Blair survived politically and led his Labour Party to another general election victory. More importantly, the Anglo-American military alliance and the durable wider NATO structure were never really seriously threatened.

Economic similarities strengthen cooperation. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s deregulation of the economy in the 1980s paid powerful dividends and reflected tandem efforts by President Ronald Reagan.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reenergized the NATO alliance, in which Britain plays a continuing role in joining North America to Europe.

Sir Lindsay Hoyle, Speaker of the House of Commons, invited Speaker Johnson to address Parliament.

Well done all around. Bravo, speakers!

Arthur I. Cyr is author of “After the Cold War.”

Contact acyr@carthage.edu