Whatever you think of Keir Starmer, you can’t argue that he’s in a bit of a tough spot right now.
Low approval ratings, a by-election disaster, and now blindsided by chaos and war in the Middle East.
But whether Starmer appreciates it or not, he’s just been handed the biggest gift of his political career.
Not because he’s done anything especially brilliant, but because he’s been given a leg up by an unlikely source – Donald Trump.
The US President’s latest rant about the UK involved him telling The Sun that Starmer hadn’t been ‘helpful’ in aiding offensive strikes in Iran.
He criticised Sadiq Khan, again, and the UK’s immigration levels. But, believe it or not, this could actually do some good.
Want to understand more about how politics affects your life?
Metro’s senior politics reporter Craig Munro breaks down all the chaos into easy to follow insight, in Metro‘s politics newsletter Alright, Gov? Sent every Wednesday. Sign up here.
There is an opportunity for the Prime Minister to finally repudiate Trump, set himself and the country on a better path, and even improve his own fortunes.
Starmer needs only to read the room. YouGov’s polling this week found that only 28% of Brits support America’s military strikes on Iran, with 49% opposed.
Compare that figure to Ukraine, where nearly two-thirds of Britons back sending our soldiers as peacekeepers.
The British public is perfectly capable of distinguishing between defensive support for a democracy under unprovoked invasion and offensive airstrikes of deeply questionable legality, no matter how unsavoury the repressive regime was.
We are not clamouring to follow America into another Middle Eastern war.
Starmer, to his credit, said as much: ‘This government does not believe in regime change from the skies,’ he told the Commons in a momentarily surprising direct rebuke of a sitting US president during an active military operation.
His communications team, or whatever’s left of it, must have been relieved about the clarity with which it landed.
And then, right on cue, Trump opened his mouth, and everything changed.
In his interview, the President called Britain ‘unhelpful’, complained about ‘people from foreign lands who hate you’ and suggested America no longer needed us.
Trump seems to have declared the special relationship over. So as we take stock of this conscious uncoupling, it is worth considering exactly what we got out of it.
Well, the ledger doesn’t look great. We followed America into Iraq on the basis of totally bogus intelligence. We then marched into Afghanistan for two decades and watched the fallout on TV like a horrifying scene in a dystopian film.
We bent over backwards for a post-Brexit trade deal, and all we got was a row about chlorinated chicken.
We handed out Royal State invites like sweets to move the needle on Ukraine, only for reports less than a month later to reveal Trump is considering plans to potentially deport 240,000 Ukrainian refugees straight back into the jaws of a deadly war zone.
We’ve been here a hundred times. You cannot bomb your way to democracy. All you do is blow up any chance for diplomacy. Dropping from the sky without a legal basis or an exit plan isn’t the British way.
And now, just this one time, we politely decline to fully jump in at the deep end with his airstrikes, and we’re slapped down and thrown to the naughty step like a kid who doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong.
But this is where Trump has catastrophically misread who the British people are.
We are the people whose support for Ukraine has not wavered, even as our own problems have grown. We are the country that funded aid, trained soldiers and built weapons for Ukraine while he cosied up to Putin and his second-in-command ridiculed their heroic leader.
No matter how much we disagree in our own country, one thing is for sure – our moral core is not up for negotiation, and it is certainly not for sale to a president who thinks a phone call and a measly trade deal are enough to make us look the other way while bombs fall on Tehran.
We don’t need an interview with a British newspaper to tell us that Trump is not exactly a faithful ally.
Every focus group, poll, and frankly any conversation in the country will tell you that the appetite for following this particular administration anywhere – militarily, culturally, economically – is somewhere between minimal and non-existent.
Do you think Keir Starmer should publicly oppose Donald Trump’s criticism?
-
Yes, it's a good opportunity for him.
-
No, he should avoid conflict.
-
It depends on the political strategy.
Which brings us back to Starmer and the gift he has been given.
Starmer has repeatedly failed to grasp any opportunity for his ‘Love Actually moment’, but there is a version of the future that political historians might finally describe as that.
Starmer’s popularity, or lack thereof, is no secret. The only politician the British public can’t stand more is Trump himself. I’m not revelling in our Prime Minister’s unpopularity, but that contrast is not nothing.
If he had any sense, Starmer would now build a genuinely independent British foreign policy – closer to Europe, rooted in international law and the national interest – without looking like the one who walked away from whatever shreds of the ‘special relationship’ are left.
If he stood up now, looked down the lens, and said clearly that we will not be talked to like this and will not be dragged along for the ride, it would be the most popular thing he’s ever done. And it would be a moment of triumph that Trump has handed it to him on a plate.
Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk.
Share your views in the comments below.
