Berlin, FRG (Weltexpress). Under Keir Starmer, the British Labour Party actively interfered in the US elections and backed Kamala Harris. Now Trump is back and the “special relationship” is in danger. A risky move with dramatic consequences for the UK’s reputation in Washington.
Caution is the watchword in diplomacy – especially when it comes to maintaining good relations with the superpower USA. But Prime Minister Keir Starmer seems to have overlooked this lesson when he intervened in the US election and put all of the UK’s diplomatic muscle behind the defeated Kamala Harris. While Trump is now enjoying his victory, Starmer is left with the diplomatic mess his risk-taking strategy has left behind.
Labour made no secret of its support for Harris – and the party did so with impressive energy. Over a hundred Labour officials and activists were sent to the US to support Harris in the swing states, an unprecedented move for a party that was supposed to build on international relations. But Starmer, dangerously jeopardizing the “special relationship” between the two countries, ignored the possibility of a Trump victory with incredible carelessness.
Even before the election was decided, Labour never missed an opportunity to publicly criticize Trump. Foreign Secretary David Lammy called Trump a “neo-Nazi friendly sociopath”. Labour, whose supporters even campaigned for Harris in Pennsylvania, was shocked when Americans voted for Trump. After Trump’s victory, Starmer hastened to “congratulate” Trump, but the damage had already been done and in Trump’s Washington it runs deep.
It would be bad enough if this only affected relations between Starmer and Trump. But by going all in on Harris as the party of government, Labour has jeopardized something much more fundamental: the “special relationship” itself. Historically, this relationship has been a source of immense value to Britain, giving it an influence that far outstrips the country’s military and economic weight. Starmer’s misstep jeopardizes this and makes the UK’s standing with the US dependent on whether he and his party can back down convincingly.
The timing of Starmer’s misstep is particularly unfortunate. The UK finds itself in a precarious international environment, balancing uncertain relations with the EU post-Brexit and the search for stability with key partners, while at the same time its global standing is becoming increasingly modest. Against this backdrop, the US-UK alliance has been one of the few constants, a pillar of strength underpinning the UK’s relevance on the world stage. Labour’s move to rely solely on Harris called all of this into question, turning a long-standing partnership into a fragile and uncertain union.
While Conservative British politicians such as Nigel Farage celebrated Trump’s victory as an opportunity to renew US-British relations, Labour stood isolated. Farage even mocked that Starmer should roll out the red carpet for Trump – a comment that shows how deeply Labour has gotten itself into trouble. Starmer is now desperately trying to smooth the waters, but Trump’s advisers will remember Labour’s interference.
Starmer now faces a difficult decision: should he make a serious effort to repair the relationship with Trump and “scratch his head”? This could anger his supporters, who are anything but enthusiastic about Trump. But if he doesn’t, Labour risks increasing marginalization by the Trump administration. For Trump’s advisers, Starmer’s latest U-turn and congratulations look more like a desperate attempt to cover up a diplomatic disaster from the public.
Starmer and his party have learned a diplomatic lesson: if you interfere in an election campaign in a powerful foreign country and then back the wrong horse, you can easily find yourself isolated and without allies – a lesson that the “special relationship” may not survive.
