Starmer visits Washington to build bridges between Europe and the United States
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0609e/0609e866e6da8fa440e15c54b28242b804542fe0" alt="Starmer visits Washington to build bridges between Europe and the United States"
Keir Starmer is set to perform the most risky balancing act since becoming British Prime Minister almost eight months ago. His visit to Washington has a triple objective: to convince Donald Trump that his country remains the most reliable ally on the other side of the Atlantic (the “special relationship” since the time of Winston Churchill); to coordinate his efforts with European allies to redirect the Ukraine crisis and for everyone to speak with one voice, now that he is desperately seeking a reset of relations with the European Union ; and finally, to protect British commercial interests in the face of a tariff trade war that catches London in the cold and lonely zone where Brexit left it .
Every prime minister hopes to dance alone with the new tenant of the White House. Tony Blair played at being Europe's mediator with Washington , when George W. Bush had already decided on his own to launch a devastating war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The most pro-EU British government of recent decades only managed to get Spain to join it, as will always be remembered by the photo of the Azores trio , with Blair, Bush and José María Aznar as an uninvited guest.
Starmer is currently working hand-in-hand with French President Emmanuel Macron . The two exchanged information by phone after the former’s visit to the White House earlier this week. And a meeting of “several European leaders” — it remains unclear who will be there — is being prepared for this Sunday in London to discuss future defence plans.
But the British leader wanted to make his own gestures, gradually, so that his welcome in the American capital would be as warm as possible. He was the first to commit to sending soldiers to Ukraine as a peacekeeping force, as suggested by Washington. He was the first to officially commit to increasing his defence budget (from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5% in April 2027, and the commitment to reach 3% in the next legislative period). And he made this decision at the cost of reducing spending on development aid, from 0.5% to 0.3%. The same coldness and the same display of priorities expressed by the Trump government, when it cut the foreign aid budget of the Agency for International Development (USAID).
“In times like these, the defence and security of the British people must always come first. That is the number one priority of this Government,” Starmer justified a decision that has put humanitarian aid organisations on alert and scandalised a section of the Labour Party.
“We are a government of pragmatists, not ideologues. We had to strike a balance between our compassionate internationalism and the needs of our national security,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy responded immediately in an article for The Guardian .
Nods of approval from WashingtonStarmer shared the decision to increase military spending with a very small circle of his team, but ordered his defence minister, John Healey, to immediately communicate the news to his American counterpart, Pete Hegseth, minutes before the prime minister made it public in his speech to the House of Commons. “A firm step by a long-standing partner,” Hegseth immediately reacted on his account on the social network X .
Just got off the phone w/ @JohnHealey_MP — the UK Secretary of State for Defense — who confirmed they will increase defense spending to 2.5% of GDP, and eventually much further.
A strong step from an enduring partner. 🇺🇸🇬🇧 https://t.co/p1C2By8ze3
— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) February 25, 2025
The British prime minister is pursuing goals identical to those of the EU, which focus on stopping Trump's desire to disengage from NATO and the security of the continent. "In the coming weeks and months, can a deal be forged that ends the war and does not leave Ukraine feeling defeated or Europe feeling at risk? A deal that returns the transatlantic relationship to normal? It will not be easy, and the prime minister's visit to the White House is just another brick in the search for answers to these questions," wrote BBC political correspondent Chris Mason.
Starmer's manoeuvres are aimed at these goals, but they are not entirely altruistic. They also seek to place the United Kingdom in the best possible situation in the face of a geopolitical earthquake that has left everyone off guard. "We must reject this false choice between allies, between one side of the Atlantic and the other. It goes against our own history - that of the country and that of the Labour Party itself - and against our national interests," the British Prime Minister has repeated in recent hours. "The alliance with the United States is our most important bilateral relationship. I will tell President Trump that I want that relationship to be strengthened even further, but for that we need a new alliance with Europe. Our commitment to European defence is unwavering, and the time has come to make it stronger," Starmer assured the deputies of the British Parliament.
The Prime Minister wants to secure in Washington a special protection for the United Kingdom against the threat of tariffs that Trump has launched against Europe. He will try to convince him that the trade balance between their two countries is sufficiently balanced to require extraordinary punishments. And he will again offer him the British alliance with the big American technology companies for the advancement and exploitation of Artificial Intelligence.
Starmer has shown a virtuous caution in recent weeks, ignoring provocations from Trump entourage such as billionaire Elon Musk and Vice President JD Vance, while seeking common ground and praising the US president’s strategy in Ukraine as a wake-up call for Europe. It remains to be seen whether all these gestures, like the displays of complicity between Macron and the US dignitary earlier this week, succeed in bringing about any change in Trump’s policy, or are reduced to temporary truces awaiting the next surprise.
EL PAÍS