When Sir Keir Starmer meets with Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday, it will mark one of the most pivotal encounters between a British prime minister and a US president in recent memory. While Starmer is not the first UK leader to engage with the unpredictable Trump—Theresa May and Boris Johnson have navigated similar waters—this meeting arrives at a time of heightened geopolitical tension.
During their private discussions in Washington, Starmer faces the daunting task of persuading Trump not to lean towards Russia in its ongoing conflict with Ukraine. At the same time, he must tread carefully to avoid alienating the president with overt criticism, all while keeping the focus on a range of other pressing issues.
Ukraine: Ensuring Russia Remains Isolated and America Engaged
The UK government’s strategy of increasing support for Ukraine—to prevent further territorial losses to Russia and position the country favorably ahead of any potential peace negotiations—stands in stark contrast to the current US administration’s approach. Insiders within Whitehall assert that Starmer is not hesitant to highlight these differences. For instance, just last week, he openly contradicted Trump’s characterization of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator,” a move seen as a calculated effort to demonstrate his willingness to challenge Trump when necessary.
Nevertheless, Starmer’s advisors emphasize that his primary role in this meeting is to act as a “bridge” between Europe and America. This perspective suggests he must exercise caution when openly criticizing the White House, especially compared to some European leaders. His specific objective in discussions with Trump is likely to secure a commitment to involve Ukraine directly in any negotiations regarding a potential ceasefire. Ed Arnold from the defense think tank RUSI noted, “Starmer must appeal to Trump’s ego and emotions, making a compelling case for how his reputation and standing could suffer if he is outmaneuvered by Russia during negotiations.” The UK is also keen to obtain more clarity from the US regarding a potential “backstop” in any peace agreement, which European officials privately hope would entail American missiles targeting Russia if it violates a ceasefire.
Defence: Reinforcing Britain’s Commitment
The timing of Starmer’s announcement regarding a significant increase in UK defense spending—just a day before his departure for Washington—was certainly intentional. Starmer aims to underscore to Trump that the UK is shouldering its fair share of the burden for European defense. Additionally, he will seek to reinforce the US’s commitment to NATO, having dismissed suggestions from French President Emmanuel Macron that the transatlantic alliance is no longer the best guarantor of security on the continent. Arnold from RUSI commented, “Starmer should feel empowered to directly challenge the prevailing sentiments about NATO in Trump’s circle. He should highlight the economic advantages of the alliance and its strategic importance in countering the ‘pacing challenge’ posed by China.” When May first met Trump in 2017, she successfully extracted a promise from him to honor NATO’s principle of collective defense; Starmer would undoubtedly be pleased to achieve a similar outcome.
Tariffs: Advocating for the UK
Government sources suggest that the UK’s best chance of avoiding the punitive tariffs Trump is considering imposing on various trading partners lies in arguing that trade between the nations is already well-balanced. However, Starmer faces another challenge: Trump has recently declared VAT to be a form of tariff, threatening to impose a “reciprocal” 20 percent levy on imports from the UK. While the Prime Minister may prefer to steer clear of a debate on economic theory, he must convince Trump that the US is not being treated unjustly. Here, Starmer’s strategy of appealing to Trump’s admiration for the British royal family, alongside his own British heritage, could prove vital. He aims for Trump to view the UK not merely as another partner, but as a privileged ally. Ben Ramanauskas, a former trade advisor to the British government, also suggests leveraging a commitment to reduce economic ties with China as a means to win Trump’s favor: “The Government should be prepared to demonstrate that it shares Trump’s concerns regarding China by promising to diminish reliance on it.”
Chagos: Hoping for Silence
The ongoing negotiations regarding British sovereignty over the remote Chagos Islands are currently stalled due to uncertainties surrounding the future of the UK/US military base situated there. Senior officials within the Trump administration have voiced skepticism about the agreement and have even called for its cancellation, suggesting that Starmer may prefer to avoid raising the issue unless prompted. Should it arise in discussion, the arguments Starmer is likely to present were previously outlined in an article for The i Paper by former Foreign Office chief Simon McDonald. He stated, “The deal ensures the base remains under Western control for at least the next four generations.” Once again, the central argument is that maintaining unity on this matter strengthens America’s position in the contest for dominance over China.
Trade Deal: Taking Incremental Steps
While preventing a tariff war remains the government’s immediate priority concerning transatlantic trade, ministers also hope to lay the groundwork for a comprehensive free-trade agreement in the future. Sources within Whitehall report that the UK intends to revive previous trade talks that were put on hold following Joe Biden’s ascension to the presidency. However, during his initial conversations with Trump, the Prime Minister will likely seek to avoid making commitments on contentious issues, such as accepting US agricultural standards or allowing American firms to bid on NHS contracts.
Middle East: Promoting Peace
The UK has largely played a secondary role in the Middle East thus far, with the US taking the lead in encouraging Israel to pursue a ceasefire in its conflict with Gaza. Starmer understands that his influence on Trump’s stance regarding this issue may be limited, but he remains keen to ensure that Israel is held accountable for adhering to international humanitarian laws.
