Inside UK Labour’s push for a US special relationship — even with Trump (2024)

LONDON — His big moment may not have to wait much longer.

If, as polls predict, Keir Starmer becomes prime minister in the U.K’s general election due on July 4, he'll likely find himself sitting next to Joe Biden within days.

NATO’s 75th anniversary summit would afford Labour’s leader the opportunity to enjoy the high-profile handshake with the U.S. president he pitched for — in vain — during his four long years in opposition.

That would be Starmer's first step in a new “special relationship” with his U.S. counterparts — a task made trickier by the dramatic developments of recent days. While it remains unclear if Biden or now convicted felon Donald Trump will be in the White House next year, the Labour leader will walk a diplomatic tightrope.

In preparation for his trip, Labour has been genning up on how these moments usually play out. Two of those close to the process, granted anonymity to talk freely, told POLITICO the team around Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy — who would also be expected at the summit — had been taking soundings from senior figures under ex-PMs Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. These include former No. 10 chief of staff Jonathan Powell, who introduced Blair to Bill Clinton in 1993.

Also attending the summit will be U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who would be expected to meet the new (if Labour wins) Defense Secretary John Healey. Labour has already given backing for the U.K. and U.S. arming Ukraine, and striking Houthi missiles aimed at shipping in the Red Sea. Starmer met Blinken in February.

Together, the six men could boast of a new era for the special relationship — a center-left bulwark against authoritarian China, Russia and Iran.

Well … for a while at least.

One day after NATO’s summit formally opens on July 10, Trump will be sentenced on 34 charges of falsifying business records. On July 15, republicans meet to confirm him as their presidential nominee.

It is “an unprecedented situation, there’s no doubt about that,” Starmer half-chuckled Friday. He insisted: “We will work with whoever is elected … We have a special relationship with the U.S. that transcends whoever the president is.”

Business and pleasure

For Labour but particularly Lammy — who has gone from describing Trump as a “racist KKK and Nazi sympathizer” in 2017 to saying the ex-president is “often misunderstood” — working with team Trump is business. Dealing with Democrats is pleasure.

Lammy has been friends with Barack Obama for two decades, enjoying a “wonderful” dinner with the ex-president in London in March. American centrists Matt Bennett and Josh Freed, of the think tank Third Way, advised Labour officials on election messaging over dinner last year. Labour’s one-word campaign slogan, “change,” even recalls Obama’s “hope” in 2008. (A Labour strategist insists there is no connection).

But since January Lammy has been busy expanding his Republican contacts into the MAGA aisle. He has met Trump campaign adviser Chris LaCivita; Trump’s former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien and deputy NSA Matt Pottinger; and Republican members of Congress JD Vance, Lindsey Graham, Joe Wilson, Jim Risch, Thom Tillis and Pete Ricketts.

Evidently Lammy smells an imbalance — but also an opportunity. Pro-Trump Republicans were furious when current foreign secretary and ex-PM David Cameron compared withholding Ukrainian aid to the appeasem*nt of Hitler. By contrast ElbridgeColby, spoken of as a possible Trump security adviser, praised Lammy's approach on POLITICO's Power Play podcast.

Starmer’s former policy director Claire Ainsley, who now works for the Progressive Policy Institute, a Democrat-aligned U.S. think tank, said: “I'm sure it's no secret that there would be a desire — particularly in a more insecure world — for there to be a Biden presidency, and Starmer in power in the U.K, and perhaps [Social Democratic Party Chancellor Olaf] Scholz in Germany.

“But they've been pragmatic about building those relationships with the [potential future] Trump administration.”

Finding the right character of ambassador

If as predicted he wins the election, Starmer will have to decide whether to keep staunch Atlanticist Lammy as foreign secretary — his aides describe speculation Lammy could be replaced as untrue.

Conservative strategists are preparing to exploit what they see as Lammy’s weak spots, including voting against the renewal of Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons programme in 2016. But one U.K. government official — granted anonymity to speak frankly — argued Lammy’s recent U.S. visits were viewed as a success, opening some “senior doors” with red and blue politicians alike: “He can talk to Americans in their own way.”

An even more important decision, perhaps, will be who to make Britain’s ambassador to Washington — especially if Trump wins in November.

Straight-talking Karen Pierce expects to leave the post around the time of the presidential inauguration in January. “She's such a character, she could sometimes have a conversation with [Trump] where some of your more straight-laced diplomats necessarily wouldn't cut through,” a second U.K. government official said.

Tim Barrow, Downing Street’s former Brexit negotiator and departing national security adviser, was tipped for the job — but a successor won’t now be announced until after the election, following a backlash from Labour about the timing. Cameron, a Conservative, has privately laughed off press speculation that he could get the gig. Trump's favored pick — leading Brexiteer Nigel Farage — would not be on Labour's shortlist.

Labour could seek an IRA deal

The most important question for America is what Labour’s future foreign policy would look like. The party tacks close to existing U.K. positions on Ukraine and Houthi attacks on shipping, and backed British-American strikes on Iranian drones fired toward Israel. But not everything would stay the same.

Lammy points to two buzz-phrases, the meaning of which can feel elusive: “progressive realism” and “securonomics.” The former is about recognizing a center-left government would have to do business with nations it disagrees with. The latter, Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ version of “Bidenomics” with much less government funding, has an “active state” working with the market to boost U.K. supply chains.

Lammy would “make it a priority” for British ambassadors to promote investment, though there will likely be no bandwidth to discuss a long-stalled U.S-U.K. free trade deal until after November. Instead, Lammy has said he wants to voice concerns about having been “left out” of carve-outs for subsidies under Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Labour has promised to focus on the supply chain of critical minerals — vital for electric vehicle batteries — to be less reliant on China, through what it calls a “buyers' club” of nations in a global “clean power alliance.” The U.K. and U.S. already signed the Atlantic Declaration, which includes joint work on critical minerals, last June.

Olivia O’Sullivan, of the foreign affairs think tank Chatham House, said: “It may be that there's a prospect to do some kind of deal … that enables the U.K. to access some benefits under IRA.”

But this calibrated approach to trade could butt up not just against Trump — who has already promised a “100 percent tariff on every single car” — but a wider hesitancy around free trade.

The second U.K. official quoted above said: “Trump won the argument by basically saying, hey, let's all be protectionist again. And Biden hasn't moved away from that — he's just found new ways of being protectionist, whether it's about China, electric vehicles, or a whole bunch of other stuff. It's become in vogue again to introduce tariffs to protect your industries.” It will be interesting to see how “securonomics” deals with that issue, the official added.

Questions on defense spending

Ainsley argued Labour would give the special relationship a “fresh start” regardless of who is president. But not every difference would necessarily be welcomed in the White House, whoever the occupant.

Starmer and Lammy would have a careful line to tread on China, even without a Trump presidency. Lammy has said it is “in everyone’s interest that China’s relationship with the West endure and evolve,” points to Blinken visiting Beijing last month, and has not ruled out visiting himself. But, O’Sullivan argues: “Where we define China as an ‘epoch-defining challenge,’ there's a bipartisan consensus in the U.S. that they are an adversary.”

The bigger impact on the special relationship is likely to come from Washington turning a broader focus on Beijing. Lammy wrote recently this could mean the U.S. has “less bandwidth for action elsewhere” — compelling the U.K. to “develop closer foreign and security cooperation with the EU.”

Labour will face pressure at home to set a date on its desire to raise defense spending to 2.5 percent of GDP. Britain’s spending is already above the 2 percent NATO target — which could put it in Trump’s good books — but the ruling Conservatives set a deadline of 2030. Labour characterized that pledge as badly costed.

Another source of tension, with Biden or Trump, will be Labour’s tightrope-walking on the Israel-Gaza war. While Labour’s position has generally been similar to the current Conservative U.K. government (and therefore the U.S.), it has taken a strikingly different approach on the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeking an arrest warrant for leaders of both Israel and Hamas. While Biden called this “outrageous,” ex-lawyers Lammy and Starmer stressed they respected the ICC’s independence.

'Ruthlessness and flexibility'

Speaking on Power Play Thursday, U.S. Ambassador to London Jane Hartley highlighted a subtle difference in the pair’s approach, pointing out that while Lammy had said the U.K. would have a legal obligation to comply with a warrant if issued: “I don’t think Keir Starmer has said that ...”

Like Biden in the States, Starmer is balancing the pressures of diplomacy with the pro-Palestinian views of more disillusioned parts of his base. Labour lost control of a series of English councils last month after local politicians quit the party over his refusal to condemn Israel’s bombardment of Gaza more forcefully. Starmer has said he wants to recognize a Palestinian state, but only as part of a process to peace.

Ultimately, it is impossible to predict with any clarity how a Labour government would interact with the U.S. after November. This is partly because Trump is so unpredictable — presenting a stark contrast to Starmer's meticulous, bureaucratic approach to policymaking.

But also unpredictable, in his own way, is Starmer. His leadership has been characterized by a focus on what is needed to win and keep power — including jettisoning left-wing pledges he made to party members in 2020.

Sophia Gaston, head of foreign policy at the Policy Exchange think tank, said: “It is true that, should Keir Starmer and President Trump both win their elections, the deep alignment we have seen … may come under strain in future.

“But it is by no means a foregone conclusion. In a strange way, both Starmer and Trump have demonstrated a degree of political ruthlessness and positional flexibility to secure power.”

Esther Webber, Graham Lanktree and Anne McElvoy contributed reporting from London. Paul McLeary contributed reporting from Washington.