As an American who has spent his career contemplating and writing about the monarchy and the US-UK relationship, my skills were put to the test this week after the departure of Queen Elizabeth II. She leaves an unfillable void, not only in the hearts of those she represented but also for many of us beyond her realm, including here in America.

I once met Condoleezza Rice at a Washington Christmas party. I asked this brilliant politician and professor, who had been both US Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, what stood out as the most memorable moment of her career. Do you know what she answered? ‘Playing piano at Buckingham Palace for the Queen and Prince Philip.’

I can fully relate. As an advisor to Congress on US-UK affairs I was invited to meet the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh in 2007, on their last ever official visit to the United States. That occasion is perhaps the most memorable moment of my life. It left no ambiguity as to why a meeting with the Queen was the most sought after diplomatic encounter, bar none, and why even the world’s strongmen were humbled in her presence.

Media coverage in the US, with a few outliers such as the UK-hating New York Times, has wholehearted embraced the significance of the great Queen and her passing. Even ‘I’m Irish’ Biden remembered to lower the flags to half-staff.

Why should Americans care so deeply? After all, we are taught in school that we broke away in 1776 and dumped the monarchy and tyrannical George III (conversations with my friend Andrew Roberts has provided calibration on that score), and wrote all of our grievances down in our Declaration of Independence — as if we and not the English invented constitutional liberty. Why not just admire the parades, castles and jewels from afar and be content that someone else has paid for them?

For some, the answer is craving what you can’t have. For others, it’s about envy of social status that mere celebrity can’t attain. For those like me, it’s deep admiration of our mother country and for the supremely devoted yet authoritative Queen who had a lifelong commitment to the welfare of her country, the Commonwealth and the world at large.

It is difficult for most Americans to wrap their minds around the intimate mutual affection that Britons and members of the Commonwealth had for the Queen, and the blessings of stability, national pride and cohesion this caused.

Also hard to grasp is that the Kingdom is comprised of four nations, sometimes with competing interests, and that the monarchy is the glue that holds those pieces together. Beyond the institution, the Queen, with all her admirable qualities, made this personal. She was always dignified, never distant, and that was the lynchpin of her success.

America was founded only 240 years ago by rejecting the monarchy. Unarguably, it has been a stunning success – the world’s foremost constitutional democracy. With all of our good intentions, however, by combining the roles of head of state and government, we lost something profound. Unavoidably under the US constitution, these roles are held by a single politician. Only very rarely, if ever, has a president been able to hold a candle to Queen Elizabeth. And if they did, it was only for a fraction of the duration of her reign.

The US is never going to re-adopt monarchy. There is a risk, however, that the UK could become a republic. The example of Elizabeth’s reign demonstrates amply why that would be a terrible outcome. As does what could potentially follow. I can sum this up in two words: President Blair.

Unfortunately our US system provides no possibility of a beloved apolitical monarch who unites us and reminds us of the noblest elements of our history and values. We could benefit immeasurably from such an influence to assuage the seething divisions that now plague America and to remind us of what makes us great. Think long and hard, Britain, before eliminating something of such enduring and fundamental value, something that elevates you among nations.