Keir Starmer, the UK’s new prime minister, was calm on the topic of relations with the US due to his vote, choosing to prevent, in particular, speak of how he would handle a second Donald Trump presidency.
Starmer is a center-left politician, the first to rule the UK for over ten years, so his opinions do n’t really align with Trump’s. However, the US presidential election is only a few months away, and depending on the outcome, the connection between the UK and the US was differ significantly.
The new American government will be focusing on how to prepare for Trump’s possible resumption of office in January 2025 following the first US vote conversation and Joe Biden’s subpar performance. And while Starmer has kept quiet in private, his and his best crew had spent some time planning behind the scenes.
They made a lot of energy before becoming leaders in the US. This is a well-traveled-about way for UK Labour officials, which was most notably demonstrated by the close friendship between Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, and Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
Amazingly, Starmer and his foreign minister, David Lammy, have been trying to build ties on both sides of the aisle. On US trips, they have spoken with both Republicans and Democrats, as well as Biden.
Lammy, who was the first dark European man to study at Harvard Law School and practice law in the US after college, just stated in a statement that the unique relationship is” key not just to our own national protection, but the safety of much of the earth.”
He said that the two sides must work together “whoever is in the White House,” in response to a query about previous remarks he had made about Trump.
The respondent may have been referring to Lammy’s comments about Trump being a “racist KKK and Nazi sympathizer” before he became a minister. Lammy also said he would take to the roads if Trump was allowed to enter the UK.
Lammy’s careful response to questioning today reflects his much more tempered attitude toward the subject since it first appeared as though Labour could actually gain strength, and he may be a member of the cabinet.
Proving the UK is valuable
Starmer may attempt to demonstrate the relevance of the UK in the US-UK empire. With Biden, this will be very program. But, Starmer would need to demonstrate this significance to those who are close to Trump in the event of a Trump victory in November, which is a more challenging work.
Socially, Starmer can support US administrations manage relations with NATO, encouraging more anxious members, such as Germany, whilst restraining some of the more strategic NATO members pushing to increase the alliance.
Starmer will also need to work with European allies to demonstrate the relevance of NATO to the US in light of Trump’s stated commitment to reevaluating the purpose of NATO.
Militarily, the UK has to demonstrate intent to restore the armed forces, especially after the US declared that the UK military was no longer a” top- tier” military partner.
Doing so would demonstrate that the new British government is paying attention to its American allies and would also demonstrate that the UK plans to be able to deploy its military to support US and NATO operations. Trump has repeatedly cited his reluctance to use the US military and his belief that allies are more responsible for the military burden.
Starmer will be negotiating with President Biden until the November presidential election. After a recent D-Day celebration and less than a week after taking office, Starmer will meet Biden once more as prime minister at a Nato summit.
Starmer will have to tread carefully in this area, just like he does for other world leaders. Given that Trump has a vehement dislike for his successor, having a close relationship with the Biden administration could be challenging when attempting to establish trust with any incoming Trump administration.
Since taking office, Biden has set out his foreign policy priorities, including guardrails on the relationship with Russia, and competition with China. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, these guardrails flew off. The Biden administration has nevertheless established clear priorities and was able to coordinate international assistance for Ukraine.
In contrast, Trump has given little insight into how he would approach foreign policy. He has stated he will “end” the conflict in Ukraine, but he has not provided any specifics about how.
We are aware that he wants to stop funding Ukraine’s defense efforts and that he wants European allies to pay for the replenishment of US military equipment. Additionally, he has pledged to support Hamas ‘ conflict in Gaza, which has caused a Starmer’s party’s leadership since the election, which has caused a rift between the two countries.
During his first term, Democratic leaders from all over the world struggled to deal with Trump. They typically had to ignore the controversy that had surrounded him or use them as a justification for Trump. The former US president’s preference for” strongmen” was repeatedly on show.
It would be nearly impossible for Starmer to imitate those who roll out the red carpet and parade through the streets of Trump’s preferred style. Given that the UK’s free speech laws prohibit protests against Trump if he were to visit, and they are practically unavoidable given what transpired last time he was there.
Starmer would do his best to stay away from Trump’s state visit, which might include meeting with the king.
The implications for the” special relationship” are obvious: demonstrating the value of the UK will be much simpler for Starmer in a Biden presidency than in a Trump presidency. Starmer would feel compelled to take action against Trump’s refusal to support it, which would further undermine the US-UK alliance.
The new government of the UK has been discussing potential relations with either a Republican or a Democratic president. Starmer will be hoping for the predictability of Biden while planning for the chaos of Trump, as will be the case for many world leaders.
Christopher Featherstone is Associate Lecturer, Department of Politics, University of York
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.