As the divide between the United States and its Western allies widens regarding the future of Ukraine, Sir Keir Starmer has surprisingly stepped into the role of a key European leader addressing the crisis. Often criticized—perhaps unjustly—for being too managerial, overly formal, and lacking a robust political background, Starmer’s adept handling of his recent visit to the White House and the intense fallout from Volodymyr Zelensky’s challenging meeting with Donald Trump has garnered praise both domestically and internationally. There are even signs that Starmer’s confident approach to these delicate diplomatic situations could result in a much-needed surge in his popularity back home, potentially energizing the Government as it faces an undeniably challenging period ahead. However, the question remains: can this momentum be sustained?
When Trump regained the presidency in November, a well-informed Labour MP expressed to The i Paper that they “felt sorry” for Starmer, considering the ramifications it would have on his tenure in Number 10. “I’m not sure his driving force in politics is to be a sort of coordinator and saviour of democracy in Ukraine,” the backbencher remarked.
Starmer Finds His Political Feet
Fast forward four months, and the Prime Minister is beginning to emerge as a promising ‘Trump whisperer,’ having seemingly found his footing in the international arena. However, this growing confidence on the global stage starkly contrasts with his domestic perception. Despite a competent response to the summer riots, Starmer’s Government has struggled to gain traction with an increasingly skeptical electorate and a sluggish economy. The initial goodwill regarding Labour’s difficult inheritance was quickly overshadowed by controversial decisions, such as scrapping the winter fuel allowance and a Budget that imposed significant tax hikes on businesses while presenting dismal growth forecasts.
Yet, there is renewed optimism among Labour MPs that Starmer’s newfound political role internationally might translate into sustained domestic support from voters, reminiscent of how Margaret Thatcher’s victory in the 1982 Falklands War bolstered her popularity in the subsequent election. “There’s a lot of hope in the PLP; it’s being brought up on doorsteps—people are saying they’ve been impressed by the PM,” one Labour backbencher noted. “If there is a peace deal that lasts at least for a few years, and Keir is seen to have played a significant role in that, then that’s going to be beneficial.”
Starmer’s Falklands Moment?
This isn’t the first instance of a British leader grappling with domestic challenges while experiencing a political resurgence on the international stage. A notable historical parallel is Margaret Thatcher’s decision to engage in military action against Argentina over the Falkland Islands in 1982. At that time, the Conservatives were trailing in the polls, with Britain mired in economic difficulties that prompted skepticism about her leadership within her own party. However, Argentina’s invasion shifted national focus from domestic issues and arguably propelled Thatcher’s Tories to victory in the following election.
Speculation is rife that this could represent Starmer’s own Falklands moment. There are evident similarities: like Thatcher, the Labour leader faces difficulties in his first term, having taken charge of a nation in distress and grappling with widespread despondency. However, significant differences exist, particularly concerning Starmer’s position in the electoral cycle. Thatcher was already contending with entrenched gloom in 1982. Conversely, while it’s still early in Starmer’s tenure, he faces a far more complex and protracted situation than Thatcher did. Shielding Ukraine from an aggressive Putin hinges on factors well beyond the Prime Minister’s immediate control, and a clear victory—at least in conventional terms—already appears elusive.
Moreover, there are cautionary tales from more recent history. Starmer is not the first Labour Prime Minister to cultivate a controversial relationship with a right-wing US President. Although Tony Blair’s alliance with George W. Bush and support for the Iraq War did not cost him the 2005 election, it certainly did not bolster Labour’s image either. “If you put all your eggs in one basket and that basket collapses, that’s a problem,” another backbencher cautioned. “So if everything goes awry, there’s a risk he could be held accountable.”
Relations with Trump Cutting Through for Voters
Another MP remarked that Starmer’s largely successful meeting with Trump last week resonated significantly with the public, even being discussed during a stag do “by someone who is not remotely interested in politics.” “If we’re reaching people like that, then we’re doing well!” the MP added. Pollsters believe that Starmer’s rising profile on the diplomatic front could provide him with a favorable boost, potentially establishing a clear distinction between his Labour Party and Farage’s Reform Party, which risks being perceived as too cozy with Trump and his critical stance on Ukraine.
A YouGov poll released on Tuesday indicated that Labour experienced a two-point increase in the polls following the Prime Minister’s Washington trip and his reaction to Trump’s treatment of Zelensky. However, Tim Bale, a politics professor at Queen Mary, University of London, warned that Starmer “must tread carefully” when it comes to getting too close to Trump. “There’s only so much he can play that bridging/whispering role before he begins to appear too aligned with a President that many Brits view as either completely irrational or outright dangerous—or both,” Bale cautioned.
Warning That Boost Will Only Be Temporary
Bale added, “If he somehow proves instrumental in mending the fractured relationship between Trump and Zelenskyy and gains some electoral advantage from it, it will likely be fleeting; after all, rebounds are temporary by nature. Voters are far more concerned with domestic than foreign policy performance—wars aside, and thankfully we’re not quite at that point yet.” Polling data from the think tank More in Common, conducted over the weekend, revealed that more voters preferred Starmer as Prime Minister over any of his rivals, with support rising to 28 percent from 22 percent the previous week. It also showed Starmer’s net approval rating trending upwards, albeit still in negative territory, improving from -39 to -28.
Luke Tryl, executive director of More in Common, asserted that there’s “no doubt” Starmer has experienced a polling bump due to his diplomatic finesse, noting that the British public “appreciate the idea of Britain wielding real influence.” “For the first time, the Government appears to be on the offensive,” Tryl stated. “And the risks for Reform are quite significant.”
However, he cautioned that should Starmer’s push for a Ukrainian settlement falter, it could have adverse effects. “It risks reinforcing a prevailing sense of national gloom—that Britain lacks power, influence, and that everything is in disarray. The feeling of powerlessness is among the major drivers of discontent,” he warned. Chris Hopkins, political research director for Savanta, concurred that Starmer’s “statesman-like leadership on the international stage” has indeed aided his “ailing” domestic ratings.
Hopkins suggested that the Prime Minister’s “calm, authoritative diplomacy” has perhaps “reminded voters of what initially appealed to them about him and his party less than a year ago when he led Labour to a historic majority.” Yet, he too warned that any boost in ratings is likely to be short-lived: “Many of the criticisms Starmer and Labour have faced over the winter remain, and while effectively managing Trump may win him some accolades from commentators, it may not endure if he cannot dispel the sense of buyer’s remorse among parts of his electoral coalition that he built just months ago.”
