Keir Starmer thought he was going to have to spend the flight to Samoa for the Commonwealth summit talking about repatriations and UK aid. Instead, the Prime Minister is attempting to hose down a diplomatic spat with Donald Trump.
Team Trump have gone on the offensive over Labour staff flying to the US to campaign for the Democratic candidate Kamala Harris. This is a longstanding tradition within the Labour party, but it is being viewed differently now the party is in government. The Trump campaign has formally accused Labour of breaking US electoral law through ‘blatant foreign interference’ in the presidential election. In the letter, Trump’s team warn that when ‘representatives of the British government previously sought to go door-to-door in America, it did not end well for them’ citing the 243 anniversary of the surrender of British forces at the Battle of Yorktown.
Ministers have been out in force this morning to insist there is nothing to see here, with Defence Secretary John Healey suggesting that the Trump campaign’s complaints about Labour are effectively an electoral stunt. It’s a point that Freddy makes on Coffee House: suggesting foreign elites are getting involved could help Trump to motivate his base to get out and vote. Responding on the plane to the travelling lobby journalists, Starmer tried to play down the efforts of Labour volunteers – saying they ‘have gone over pretty much every election’.
When asked whether this row could damage his relationship with Trump should he become president, Starmer dismissed the idea:
No. I spent time in New York with President Trump, had dinner with him and my purpose in doing that was to make sure that between the two of us we established a good relationship, which we did, and we’re grateful for him for making the time.
The Prime Minister went on to say he ‘will work with whoever the American people return as their president in their elections which are very close now’.
That’s all very well and good. But the question being asked within government is whether a President Trump would work with Labour.
For more than a year now, David Lammy and his team have been seeking to build ties with senior Republicans in anticipation of a Trump return. That’s involved meetings with J.D. Vance (long before he was picked as Trump’s VP) as well as figures such as Mike Pompeo. Starmer met with Trump recently, which was seen as a diplomatic coup and went smoothly. But part of the strategy is to make sure they have lines of communication with Trump’s team, should the President prove volatile.
It would clearly be easier for Starmer if Harris is elected. A Labour delegation attended the Democrat convention this year and the two teams have shared campaign ideas and political positions, such as on immigration (Democrats are looking to Labour’s language around ‘smashing the gangs’). There is less of a clear affiliation between the Conservatives and the Republican party: some Tories back the Democrats. On the other side, there are no Labour figures backing the Republican party.
The hardest aspect of Trump is one that even Theresa May and Boris Johnson struggled with: his unpredictability
With a more conventional Republican leader, a Labour-Republican alliance wouldn’t be a particular issue. The so-called special relationship and basic diplomacy is such that the two countries will work closely, regardless of personalities. The risk remains, however, that a Labour government is simply more objectionable to Trump than a Conservative one. Look how Team Trump repeatedly refers to Starmer’s party as the ‘far-left Labour party’. Starmer has already found himself in a spat with Elon Musk, a prominent Trump backer. If the Labour government attempts to curb the online giants, both Musk and Trump could air their objections.
It’s well documented that Lammy previously attacked Trump and even led a protest against him having a state visit. In government, Lammy and Starmer have changed their tune. But if the pair rolled out the red carpet for a president Trump, how would their backbenchers react? It’s easy to imagine a group of Labour MPs going public with their grievances and Trump taking offence. Would Starmer discipline them or let them run riot? If Trump starts commenting on domestic politics and Labour’s policies, will Starmer simply stay quiet? There is precedent here after Joe Biden took the unusual step of critiquing Liz Truss’s economic approach while she was in 10 Downing Street.
This would all make a Trump-Starmer relationship difficult to navigate. But the hardest aspect is one that even Theresa May and Boris Johnson (who both were at various times the subject of Trump’s affection) struggled with: his unpredictability. Those working in No. 10 while Trump was president say that the issue wasn’t really whether he liked you or not – though it certainly helped when he wanted to be charming. The problem was that Trump would make knee-jerk decisions with little to no warning, and then it would be very difficult to get him to change course. Johnson had the best luck at this of the two prime ministers – but even he found it hard. As things stand, it’s difficult to see Starmer doing much better at bending Trump to his will. Instead the relationship could be more about damage limitation than anything else.
Comments