Right across the political spectrum there is a consensus that Keir Starmer has to make a decision on which side he will support in the rapidly opening split between Donald Trump's USA and the European Union.
The European Union did not wish to split with the USA. That is not because the EU has been exploiting the US, as Donald Trump would claim to be the case. There is no evidence to support that idea. Instead, it is because almost every EU member state had presumed until the moment of Donald Trump's inauguration that they and the USA shared a broadly similar world outlook, even when it came to such unpalatable US policies as that on Gaza.
Now it is apparent to just about everyone but the Prime Minister of the UK that this is no longer the case. For whatever the reason, and there is much to speculate about on that, it is clear that Donald Trump is now pursuing three meta-narratives that underpin his foreign policy. These are that he will:
- Support Russia, and its policy agenda, most especially when it comes to Ukraine.
- Seek to undermine the European Union.
- Drive for US geographical expansion, including at cost to NATO and EU countries.
To pretend that this is not the case is, now, absurd. Trump has now been in office for long enough, and his behaviour has been consistent enough, for it to become very clear that these three things are his policy agenda, and that he is utterly indifferent to the consequences flowing from them, whether they be for the people of Ukraine, the territories that he wishes to annex, the people of the EU, or people anywhere else in the world. He is, of course, also utterly indifferent to the interests of the people of the USA, who are undoubtedly going to be seriously harmed by this agenda.
What is also clear is that this policy agenda is so extreme that there is no room for ambiguity in anyone's reaction to it. There can now be no rational belief in the idea that was sustainable for a week or two after the inauguration that Trump might have by accident, and irrationally, upset the accepted order but that this was all in the interest of making an initial impression. It is now very obvious that the agenda has always been deliberate, and is not going to change.
For example, whether Trump is simply a Russian asset, or an agent, does not make any difference. What is clear is that there is really nothing more that he could do to advance the Russian cause, including against Ukraine, than he is already doing.
Similarly, it is clear that his intentions with regard to geographical extension of the USA are serious.
And with tariffs against the EU appearing ever more likely, and the commitment to NATO not only abandoned, but actively reversed, the EU is clearly in Trump's sightlines.
Or, I should add, all of this is clear to absolutely everyone except Keir Starmer. He is still, in classic New Labour Blairite style, dithering as to where he stands on Trump, hoping beyond all hope that Trump might really be his friend, and that the EU will in that case see him as the means of access to the US which they themselves have lost.
There is only one potential consequence of this, which is that Keir Starmer will end up looking like a bigger fool than he already does.
Starmer is not leading some grand alliance, as he wants to think. The EU can act by itself, with France and Germany taking the lead. That has become very clear over the past week.
Starmer also has no special access to Trump. That is obvious to anyone.
And if anyone believed he could read the diplomatic mood correctly, events within 24 hours of his visit to Washington only a little over a week ago have proved otherwise.
The so-called Special Relationship is over.
Trump could not care less about Starmer.
And the only influence the UK might now have can only be secured as an outlier to EU policy.
That is where we stand now. The UK is a weird little island in a four-way world power split between the USA, Russia, China and the EU. Some other BRICS states, like India and South Africa, almost certainly have more power and influence in this set up than we do.
Starmer, however, wants to pretend otherwise. He is a liability as a result.
What we need to do is work out where we stand in the new world order. The questions are:
- Do we ally with Europe?
- Do we move towards independence, with the advantages that supplies - including a radical rethink of our defence strategy?
- Do we represent that distinct voice in the UN?
- Or is our role to line up with France and Germany as the fight against fascism demands, something that our Foreign Office appears never to have been able to comprehend as an option?
There may be other options on the table, bit siding with the USA is not one of them. People in this country would not tolerate that. In that case, I cannot see those other alternatives, immediately. But what I can say is that being Trump's friend is not an option - because he has no friends, barring Putin - and we all know that won't last, with untold consequences.
Starmer might have to make a decision, and we all know how much he hates doing that.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
One factor you did not mention which makes things a little more difficult is Trump’s love of petty revenge, even at a cost to America.
I agree that Starmer needs to disengage with Trump and the USA, and while Trump deserves to be called out as a traitor to all Western values, to do so would certainly have a high cost to our country; punitive tarrifs and deactivation of military equipment with the next software update.
I think a quiet realignment without obvious calling out would be best for the UK.
Ah – ha petty!
Yes. I note tha the 4th plinth in Trafalgar square still has nothing on it.
Perhaps it could be occupied by worthy art. Stuff that makes people think a bit.
https://nypost.com/2024/09/30/us-news/pop-up-exhibit-43-foot-naked-nevada-trump-effigy-vanishes-after-roadside-ruckus/
Indeed, one could have variations on the Mango theme (still life: bed, women, Mango – perhaps with fountains?). Although my own montage would favour the scene from “The Gentleman” in which the editor of a UK rag – wakes up to find he has done something interesting/nasty….with a pig (I was weeping with laughter @ that point). Just saying. Want the US to pull out from UK? Inflatable naked Mangos – above the roads leading to the base. etc. Make Mango a laughing stock (him & Putler doing something nasty?) Lots of possibilities, all driving Mango (& Putler) crazy/angry/mad.
In many areas of politics, it can sometimes be useful, when there might be some indecision or difficulties to see what choice should be made, to think through alternative scenarios.
I suggest doing that now.
Just concentrate on what might happen if Trump takes further his stated aims with respect to Canada. I believe he will, although I pray he won’t. What would the UK’s overt policy be?
It could not be to support the US.
It could not even be neutral. The King of England is also the King of Canada; the UK foreign policy must be to support Canada actively. Any other course of action would cause a 1000 Megaton constitutional crisis.
The UK should already be offering Canada support and help.
If we aren’t quietly doing that already – why not?
Swapping sides would be hugely damaging. This therefore should remove any doubts that anyone may have. Even trying to stay neutral is actually impossible. We can only side with the European countries. What follows from that may have far greater implications than anyone would like to admit. But this is all happening due to Trump’s choices.
It is all as inevitable as night follows day.
I agree re Canada
I agree about Canada. There is a detailed warning about the real possibility of a full on land invasion and annexation of Canada (and Greenland) by Trump/MAGA by the US Intelligence expert Malcolm Nance over on substack today. Starmer presently seems to be politically hamstrung by his US ambassador Lord Mandelson’s tacit support of Trump. There is serious danger now in delaying a UK government announcement of a clear allegiance either to the EU (and therein Canada and Denmark) or the new Russo-US. Unless the British ruling class, together with their political allies in Ireland, are secretly politically angling for Swiss style neutrality in the unfolding of the coming New World Disorder.
I have only just considered the neutrality line.
I can’t see how it could / would work, but somehow see it as possible.
How could neutrality be possible when our Head of State is also Head of the Commonwealth. I just cannot square that circle.
In the current situation I don’t see how AUKUS agreement can stay in place, but then, I’m no politician.
Malcolm Nance’s assessment is seriously worrying. It really is hard to comprehend how such a thing could happen. Surely the US armed forces would mutiny if given orders like these?
Who knows? Fear is disabling.
I read the Malcolm Nance piece, it really is quite alarming.
If Trump makes any more aggressive moves toward Canada, then the state visit invitation should be rescinded. Not to do so would put the King in an impossible
and highly embarrassing position – to host, with full trappings, a man who is actively trying to annex a commonwealth country of which the King is head of state would be the most appalling spectacle, not to mention legitimising Trump’s actions.
All on the button, as usual, Prof Murphy 🙂
I’d add that how any politician – here or elsewhere – but especially the leader of a party that once prided itself on being slightly compassionate can not speak out about Trump when he says what he said on Thursday and Friday about Ukraine (e.g. after the bombardment by Putin on Thursday night: ‘anyone would have done it’. And, effectively, after the bombardment on Friday night, ‘carry on Russia as I don’t see Zelensky as being ready for peace). And, on top of all this, Trump having his people meet with the opposition parties in UIkraine to plot against Zelenskyy. And so it goes on.
So, either Starmer is an ally to Ukraine and Zelensyy, as he says. Or he’s Trump’s useful idiot – which currently he is. And surely Starmer and his advisors can see that the only reason – THE ONLY REASON _ Trump continues to be decent to them (i.e. tolerate and humour them) is that he covets that state visit to see the King so very, very much. Take that away and we’d be in the same position as the leader of every other country – apart from Russia, Hungary, North Korea, and Slovakia, of course.
By the way, on the end of NATO, I noticed various of my OSINT people flagging that the US notified the rest of NATO that they were no longer interested in being involved in NATO exercises in Europe in the future, though they MAY (but only may) continue with the ones already planned for this year (I suspect they won’t as Russia usually see them as a threat, so no doubt Putin will order Trump to cease).
To conclude, I’ll go one further and predict that the US holds joint military exercises with Russia in 2026, and may well do late in 2025. I joke not. And I’d also predict that they come to some arrangement over taking control of Greenland.
I fear that much of what you say is right
If I may Mr Horrocks, I have been in communications with somebody sitting in the HoL. This was his observation on Ukraine:
” I rather subscribe to the view that the Biden presidency was adamant that Ukraine should not be defeated, but were afraid of them winning – so enough support to survive but not for victory. A little simplistic maybe. Trump is clearly on the side of Putin. ”
I’m guessing that this is now starting to be a common view. here is a Tory MP – as far as he is concerned – Mango is a Russian asset.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxZAvKlZ7qc
One last observation:
1987 US business man invited by USSR to visit Moscow. Comes back and 2 months later puts up a full-page anti-NATO ad in New York papers. (all a matter of public record)
If it was me, in either the FBI or the CIA, I would have opened a file on Mango & followed his Ruzzian shenanigans with interest & possibly alarm – particualrly when it got to the “Russian girls have no morals” stage. Begs the question – what happened to the files? FBI & CIA allowed a Ruzzian asset to become president.
Thoughtful stuff.
I think that you are right about the Blairite bit, The Third Way thinking was all about co-opting differences and arriving at consensus to move things forward, a means of smoothing over political and ideological differences – putting aside adversarial politics.
What we learnt was that all too often, domestically , all the Third Way did was was create a foothold – Trojan horses – for more market based ideas to come to the fore. This was basically a pacification of more principled stances about public ownership, democracy, fiscal policy and budgeting in favour of markets. The profits you see, won the argument.
Using the Third Way philosophy in external international relations has proven disastrous for the world (it was Blair’s ‘intellectual’ platform to work with the Republican scum bag George Bush and his henchmen) and if Stymied thinks all he has to do is pacify Trump he is on a hiding to nothing. You cannot pacify extremists. They sense compromise or accommodation as weakness and always want more. Unfortunately you have to accommodate them until they destroy themselves or when they are rumbled by voters.
My bet is that Starmer will insert the UK between the U.S. and Europe and pose as a ‘mitigating state’ acting as some sort of balm between the two. It will be a pose with no credibility whatsoever. But since BREXIT, what credibility have we had anyway on the international stage?
Thank you, Richard.
Not unrelated and, perhaps, an indication of direction.
At work on Friday, I received two e-mails, the first from the trade body representing foreign institutions, perhaps smaller ones, and the second from the bigger and perhaps more UK focused trade body.
The former, in reply to the Lords, urged a more ambitious and wider reset of relations with the EU and suggested some practical measures.
The latter was far more focused on privatisation and deregulation. Little was said about the EU. What was interesting was interesting was the scale of engagement between the City and government and media, including having articles published and representatives on air and in print. It was like that when I was there from 2008 – 12, but we had to rely on proxies often and did not want to sound like a vuvuzela. The mask and even gloves are off now.
Although the latter has appointed a former EU official as its head of international affairs, this is more about having single market access for the City, not the wider UK, a move the Chancellor supports. The City has never cared about the UK, in case that is news to anyone, and is no longer that interested in the EU.
The above said, the big NYC banks, BlackRock and US private equity giants are the ones with the government’s ear, sometimes, like a fortnight or so ago, with a storied UK firm as a token. Their aim is to replace the British state, but have the state as a front. I think they and their Atlanticist allies and proxies will dictate where the UK will lean. They also pay more, so Labour politicians will be mindful of that as 2029 and the need to feather nests nears.
As I read the end of the week summaries, I wondered where what might be called collectively the left is. It feels like the left is like livestock in a field as a high speed trains roars by. Richard and I have lamented that.
Not unrelated, yesterday morning, mum and I chatted with two young people of West Indian origin. Somehow, the conversation shifted to Mauritius. We mentioned our intention to leave for the island in the next couple of years. The pair mentioned they have looked at emigrating there. More anecdata on quiet quitting or an intention to.
Thanks, Colonel.
Thank you, Richard.
I wish that I had better news to report.
I think that it was Ian Stevenson who recently quipped that he looked forward to a more cheerful update from me. It’s just not happening, whether on a personal or wider basis.
Over breakfast and as we watched the news today, dad said he felt the curtain coming down on the UK. When he and mum came in May 1964, six months short of their 20th birthdays, they had offers from France, Australia and Canada. They felt the UK offered much more. The UK was swinging. I was born (1970) and have lived here most of my life and don’t really want to leave, but just don’t see things getting better. There aren’t enough of us who want a better life for all, I fear.
I have to disagree.
I think most want a better life for all.
They don’t know how to create it.
Yes, Colonel, It was me who hoped for something more cheerful. It was a bit tongue in cheek ( I am given to quips and jokes ) but not entirely. I am usually an optimistic person. I used to be a Samaritan and sat with people in very dark places where there seemed no way out. Often something would emerge form the darkness in ways I never anticipated.
From my dining room I can see the tower of our parish church. It saw the Black Death, Wars of the Roses, Reformation, Civil War, Monmouth Rebellion, Industrial revolution, the Great War, the Depression, World War Two, Cold War and Boris Johnson(!). The tower is battered but still there and glows golden in the evening light after rain.
Today I saw the daffodils in the church yard as every year. The world is getting darker but there is still light and the world turns.
People like you have chosen not to join the Dark Side. You are not alone. Something may yet emerge.
All the best to you,
former ATC Corporal
Ian
I like that….
Thank you, Ian.
British govts have always mantra’d the ‘special relationship, and the ‘bridge’ role between Europe and US.
As you say Richard – both are becoming ever more meaningless – but Starmer and all other UK govts will continue the ritualistic phraseology. He doesn’t really have to chose – the choice is being made for him. The US is going its own way – so Starmer is inevitably left as part of Europe. Starmer’s goons – like Mcfadden this morning will continue echoing Tory – ‘UK leading the world’ in this or that – so will claim a leading role with Macron etc.
But the worry is that he will have no difficulty in deciding to boost ‘arms spending’ however wasteful and stupid, and suddenly find that this type of public spending miraculously boosts growth – when he has spent the last few years saying public spend has to be reduced to ‘make room’ for the private sector – which’ is the only sector which grows the economy’.
The clamour for more arms is deeply worrying. OK try to help Ukraine keep Russia at bay for as long as possible – but the first 18 months talk of Ukrainian victory always seemed stupid . We have to engage with Russia – whether through or in parallel with the UN – to try to get to a messy negotiated truce. Whatever ‘security guarantees’ can be negotiated – it clearly will not involve UK or other NATO troops on Russia’s border.
Richard says Starmer will look a bigger fool than he already is – that will be difficult – is their anything more foolish than ‘British troops on the ground’ on Russia’s border;
In the US it’s being reported that when Trump saw photographs of President Zelensky being welcomed by King Charles, he remarked that the US’s so called “special relationship” with the UK wasn’t so “special” any more.
Maybe the possibility of cancelling or postponing his visit to Balmoral and Buckingham Palace won’t need to be addressed – not that I think Starmer would cancel it. He’s still spouting the line that America is our ally when anyone can see that is simply not true and may not be for years into the future. Instead, Trump might decide the UK is too hostile to him and his fragile ego and voluntarily decline the invitation.
Thank you.
My father served in the RAF from 1964 – 91. From 1986 – 8, he was seconded to the US Air Force in Washington. He and other military professionals reckon the special relationship exists on a personal and national security professional basis, if at all, but not elsewhere. Israel may have one. That Anglo-American relationship has never existed despite the wishful thinking of many Britons, not just politicians.
We should have listened when IObama said that there was no special relationship. America first means to hell with the rest of the world.
Starmer may not have a choice. We may discover who is pulling his strings, it certainly isn’t his Labour roots.
Thank you and well said, Ian.
It seems to me that governments here are exploiting the chaos just as much as in America:
more armaments, cuts in social spending, and Germany back in the game.
Thank you, Richard.
Richard is probably right. I hope and pray so.
Starmer needs to do some history.
Remember the special relationship Thatcher had with Ronald Reagan?
Yes, the one that meant the USA could invade a Commonwealth monarchy (Queen Elizabeth) called Grenada without telling the UK in advance.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29986729
Does Starmer really expect the felonious fascist sex pest self-styled King Donald to treat the UK better than Ronald Reagan did?
Maybe if we looked at Starmer’s past we might find some clues – eg very close working with America CIA / security are head of CPS and especially his active facilitation of Assuange deportation / long term imprisonment https://www.declassifieduk.org/cps-has-destroyed-all-records-of-keir-starmers-four-trips-to-washington/. and Starmer’s membership of the Trilateral Commission https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmer-joined-secretive-cia-linked-group-while-serving-in-corbyns-shadow-cabinet/ etc.
In much the same way that Trump appears to be a Kremlin asset its not hard to believe that Starmer is a USA security asset
“Starmer has to make a choice: ”
The narrative now is that the UK is “tethered” to the USM(ango) wrt nukes. Hmm. What are we looking at here?
Nukes are a at-best mid-20th century tech with late 19th/early 20th century theoretical foundations.
Sure, H-bomb (fusion) tech is “tricky” (you need exapanded polystyene – honest) but run of the mill fission? – the hard part is the separation of the various flavours of uranium (centrifuges with “wobbly shafts” etc). Begs the question: why not UK with France? UK & France & Germany & Benelux etc all face the same problem.
But on a “always fighting the last war note”: …………
Back in the day, when doing my degree (1970s) we had a discussion on X-Ray lasers. Multiplates, grazing incidence (itn’t it funny what you remember from ++ 50 years ago?) etc etc. Tech not there then – there now. ASML (EU company) has close to x-ray lasers (deep-UV = soft X-rays). My point: Europe and UK has the tech – time to cast the USM(ango) adrift & may fate have mercy on their (a)souls – yes I know – cheap.
I have a few other ideas (not mine) which would change things fundamentally – USM has not done them but EU states could – & easily. We need to move away from allowing lunatics to define our lives. Europe deserves better than this & I’m bored & tired with a biuunch of lunatics to the west & a bunch of ex-KGB agents to the east thinking they can call the shots wrt to Europe. This gentleman speaks for Europe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmDVrV7QRrU&t=147s
I cried when watching, finally, somebody calling it the way it is.
Well worth watching
You’re spot on, Richard. I wrote yet another letter to the Guardian this morning (won’t get published) saying the same thing. Watching the desiccated Pat McFadden on the media round earlier, I thought how ludicrous the Government’s stance is on Trump’s America.
European leaders, including Starmer, realise the world has changed. McFadden repeated that this morning. The stark difference between the leaders in Europe and Starmer is that the former openly acknowledge that the world has changed BECAUSE of Trump’s alignment with Russia against Ukraine. They join the dots, which are, of course, visible from bloody space.
Starmer, for reasons which I simply fo not understand, refuses to join those dots. How is it possible to keep saying “the world has changed” and not acknowledge why?? It is crystal clear that America under Trump is not our ally. No amount of wishing it will make it true, and no amount of parroting “shared values..blah..special relationship…blah…80 years of protecting freedoms…blah” will change what is now fact.
It is precisely because “the world has changed” that Starmer is sending £2.3 billion a year to Ukraine. It is precisely because “the world has changed” that we are ramping up our defence spending to 2.5% of GDP.
Failing to acknowledge the REASON “the world has changed” whilst at the same time massively increasing our defence spending to accommodate those changes is incomprehensible.
Having said all that, a thought has just occurred to me. It ranks as a conspiracy theory, but I’ll air it anyway. Firstly, Starmer and most of his cabinet are funded by both Friends of Israel and US Healthcare companies. America has now given up any pretence of wanting a two state solution and has increased its arms supplies to Israel to “finish the job”. Starmer is very vocal in his unequivocal support for Israel. Secondly, US Healthcare companies are already deeply embedded in the UK and the NHS. Starmer has high hopes of a trade deal with America, and I’d be prepared to bet that the NHS is somewhere in that. Thirdly, Palantir, of course. Thiel already has our confidential health data. Healy announced last week that the UK now has a ?£billion deal with Anduril for drones. Anduril is heavily invested in by Peter Thiel.
I’ll stop there, and don my tin foil helmet.
I see your tinfoil helmet and don mine in support. We know that many of our politicians spend more time pandering to corporate interests than our own, so it is easy to connect the dots. It’s almost as if the 40-year experiment of allowing corporations to operate with impunity, free of regulation and constraint, was a bad idea. And as for Thiel, how is he a Tolkien fan? Does he view himself as Aragon, or does he think Sauron had a point? Whenever I hear these people speak, I am reminded of Frodo’s words to Aragorn; “I can’t help but think a servant of evil would speak fair but feel fouler.”
A last post on this thread from me, but it’s well worth reading this short thread from Gabrielius Landsbergis (ex Foreign Minister of Lithuania). In it he argues – convincingly – that a Trump-Putin pact has already been made and all we’re seeing now is Trump and his people trying to make it look otherwise, as to admit as much would be (maybe it wouldn’t to MAGA people) ‘unpalatable’ to most Americans. He recounts the treatment of Lithuanians by Russians when he was at school in the 1990s, and the fact that Lithuania was originally occupied by Russia after a false flag operation s was used to justify invasion – but had actually been part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Zelenskyy, be warned.
https://x.com/GLandsbergis/status/1897694712632389781
Thanks
This from Colonel Smithers confirms my worst fear but it is better to know that it is not just a wild fantasy.
‘The above said, the big NYC banks, BlackRock and US private equity giants are the ones with the government’s ear, sometimes, like a fortnight or so ago, with a storied UK firm as a token. Their aim is to replace the British state, but have the state as a front. I think they and their Atlanticist allies and proxies will dictate where the UK will lean. They also pay more, so Labour politicians will be mindful of that as 2029 and the need to feather nests nears.’
Thank you, Sue.
It really is depressing.
“..ago, with a storied UK firm as a token.”
That storied firm wouldn’t be H&L? I’ve just moved my ISA to there from Vanguard because of the American connection and I hope it wasn’t a false move!
Thank you, Chris.
It was Schroders.
H&L would not be invited to this type of forum. It was for the big finance houses.
One hopes the transfer works out for you.