by Rajnish Singh
With Ukraine on the agenda, can the UK prime minister emerge as Europe’s voice in the White House? The UK prime minister’s visit comes on the third anniversary of Russia’s second invasion of Ukraine. He will follow French President Emmanuel Macron, who met Trump earlier this week.
The meetings follow the surprise announcement by the Trump presidency that neither Europe nor Ukraine would be part of any direct negotiations with Russia. Instead, their views would be considered only. This sent shock waves across the EU, with many leaders reacting with anger and bewilderment.
However, they really cannot complain. The EU has not even come up with an alternative plan of what a post-war Ukraine would look like, or even a plan B if Russian troops were not able to be pushed out. They have only mentioned sending even more arms and making empty platitudes about backing Ukraine. One could question Europe’s and Biden’s commitment since they only sent enough arms for the country to defend itself rather than achieve a decisive victory.
Also, if Europe wants to be at the negotiating table, do they expect representatives from all EU27 countries, the UK, and Norway to attend the talks? And what about Turkey and Canada, NATO members, and other non-Europeans that sent military support? This reflects Europe’s political naivety in analysing how Trump operates.
An essential reading of his book, ‘The Art of the Deal,’ shows that he likes to conduct rapid, decisive negotiations. Therefore, Europe should quickly develop a realistic plan to influence the negotiations instead of complaining, which is where the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer comes in. Starmer is among the few European leaders Trump respects; he has always been consistent in his messaging, strongly supporting Ukraine and standing up to Russia. In addition, he has said the US is right about the UK and European governments needing to take more responsibility for defense.
Reflecting this push towards more defence responsibility, he stated that he was willing to send UK troops to join any peacekeeping force in Ukraine. This caused differences with Germany and Italy, who said it was too early to commit forces, although France agreed with him. But he has stressed that any peace deal must be lasting and include Ukraine at the negotiating table, which directly counters Trump’s push to sideline Kyiv in favour of a quick deal with Russia.
This shows that Starmer is not afraid to challenge Trump when necessary, yet he has been careful to frame it in practical terms. For him, a strong Ukraine strengthens Europe and stabilises global politics, a point that could appeal to Trump’s interest in projecting strength. This diplomatic tone positions him well. Unlike some European leaders who have adopted a more confrontational approach, Starmer has avoided personal attacks on Trump and focused on shared goals like security and stability.
He has emphasised his readiness to work with the US as a "backstop" to European efforts rather than as the primary contributor. This could interest Trump, who wants to reduce troop commitments abroad, especially in Europe, while claiming credit for big wins. Compare this to the comments of Germany’s Chancellor elect, Friedrich Merz, who vowed ‘independence’ from Trump’s America in his winning election speech and warned that NATO may soon be dead.
Starmer’s balancing act of maintaining close US ties while resetting European relations gives him credibility as a bridge-builder. He is not tied to the EU decision-making process, so he can pitch a flexible, UK-led European initiative that does not scare Trump off with the "Brussels bureaucracy." Therefore, do not be surprised when Starmer arrives in Washinton he will be reflecting a steely sense of cooperation that aims to be in everyone’s interest.
By: N. Peter Kramer
