- King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands recently apologized for his historical ties to slavery.
- Experts told Insider it directly contrasts the non-apology approach King Charles III has taken.
The King of the Netherlands recently took a step no British monarch has ever dared to take.
On the 160th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in the Netherlands, King Willem-Alexander offered a first-person apology for his ancestors' role in the slave trade and went even further by acknowledging how the repercussions of the practice continue to this day.
"On this day that we remember the Dutch history of slavery, I ask forgiveness for this crime against humanity," he said in a speech on July 1, 2023, according to royal author Omid Scobie. "As your king and as a member of the government, I make this apology myself. And I feel the weight of the words in my heart and my soul."
Willem-Alexander, 56, said knew his apology would likely divide opinion, Politico reported. But he made it nonetheless.
In doing so, he sparked questions about whether other monarchies, namely the British, will do the same.
Insider spoke to Kristen Meinzer, a royal watcher, Marlene Koenig, a royal historian, and Chika Okeke-Agulu, an art historian and a professor at Princeton University, about whether King Charles III — who has never openly apologized for the monarchy's historical ties to slavery — should follow suit.
The answer was a resounding yes.
Charles should follow the Dutch king's lead and stop skirting around the issue, experts say
Like its Dutch counterpart, the British monarchy has undeniable links to the slave trade, an institution only outlawed in the UK in the 19th century.
Just as a recent study commissioned by the Dutch government found that several previous kings directly profited off of slavery, so did a number of British monarchs — including Queen Elizabeth I and James I, The Guardian's David Conn reported in April.
But as the kings and queens of old are no longer with us, experts like Meinzer say there's no better time than the present for an apology, and no better person to offer it than the heads of the current royal houses.
"The right time for the King of the Netherlands to apologize for slavery was in the 1500s," she said. "But considering the monarch didn't then, or in the centuries since, the second-best time is now," Meinzer told Insider.
More than that, she said Willem-Alexander's speech shows he understands how the apology should be made: clearly, directly, and "delivered in the first-person," something that Charles and his heir, Prince William, have "skirted" around in the past.
"They've cloaked their remorse in passive language," she added. "Neither has ever stated that the British monarchy directly funded and perpetuated the transatlantic slave trade — or that, as members of the monarchy, their family (and the family business) have profited from it."
Okeke-Agulu shared a similar view, saying that the expressions of "sorrow" that both Charles and William have offered thus far are "highly watered down" ways of "acknowledging the horrors of British involvement in slavery."
According to Okeke-Agulu, Charles' decision to skirt around an apology may very well come from a fear of what that would mean in terms of reparations, but "an expression of sorrow has no legal implications," he said.
While there are different schools of thought surrounding reparations, Okeke-Agulu said there's not much point in getting stuck into those issues until an apology is made.
"The first step is a formal apology," he said. "When we get to that point, we can engage in that debate."
While reparations are complicated, Charles should be prepared not only to apologize — but to back it up
An apology without action would carry little weight, Okeke-Agulu said. Simply put: "You might just as well be reading poetry," he added.
Likewise, Koenig said an apology from Charles would undoubtedly have to "come with something else." That something else may very well be reparations, which Koenig said would have to be supported and made by the British government, "not the sovereign."
"Apologizing for something that was government related is difficult," she said.
In her view, Charles would have to work in tandem with the British government to come up with thought-out solutions and offerings on top of a formal apology. But an apology would and should still have to be made nonetheless, she added.
"You were responsible for it. Your country benefited from it. You became a world power because of it," she said.
But Meinzer suggested a direct apology may not necessarily have to be followed by an answer to questions about reparations straight away — the important first step is acknowledgment and understanding, she said.
"I think the first thing it would result in is a bit more respect for the monarchy for pulling their heads out of the sand, and for stopping the denials. The second thing it would result in is a more open dialogue — and long overdue tough conversations that need to be had everywhere — not just in the castle," she said.
"Perhaps there would also eventually be demands for reparations, but I'm OK with that," Meinzer said, adding that it would make sense to look closely at the ways the monarchy historically profited from the slave trade and how it continues to do some from the vestiges of slavery today.
If he doesn't, Charles could suffer the 'shame' of being one of the last monarchs to hold themselves accountable
While Willem-Alexander appears to be the first modern European monarch to offer a first-hand apology for his ancestral ties to slavery and colonialism, other European royal houses have shown through concerted efforts and symbolic gestures that they are willing to hold themselves accountable.
Okeke-Agulu named Belgium as an example. Under the reign of King Leopold II, Belgium caused untold devastation throughout its colonies in Central Africa in the late 1800s. According to the BBC, Leopold's rule saw upwards of 10 million African men, women, and children killed.
In recent years, Okeke-Agulu said Belgium — which remains a monarchy — has made progress, such as initiating plans to return stolen artwork to the Democratic Republic of Congo and having its current sovereign, King Philippe, make an in-person visit the former colony in an effort to achieve a level of reconciliation.
"The British had not even gotten to that point," Okeke-Agulu said. "So they might be the last to come on board, but it is to their own shame."
To not offer an apology or take further strides toward reconciliation, as his European counterparts have, would be more than a shame for Charles, according to Koenig, who said Charles has "thought" carefully about how to approach such a conversation, evident from his public support toward a research project looking into the monarchy's links to slavery, according to a Guardian report from April.
But it's not enough. And continuing down a path of silence would be allowing his son, William, and the future heirs to the British throne to carry on the burden of an apology after he's gone, Okeke-Agulu said.
"It will continue to weigh down on their souls," he said. "It is in his own best interest, for the sake of his children and grandchildren, and future generations of the Windsor family, to address the generation burden that their family has on their head."