In an unexpected twist in international relations, the recent resignation of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has reignited discussions about the state of US-British ties. With former President Donald Trump taking center stage, many are left questioning the intricacies of this shifting dynamic. Notably, some analysts, including Alexander Mercouris, suggest a history of tension leading to Starmer’s exit, yet this does not downplay John’s insights regarding the deteriorating state of the Anglo-American relationship.
By John Helmer, who has spent decades as the most enduring foreign correspondent in Russia. He is unique among western journalists, having established his own bureau free from national or commercial interests. Helmer has served as a political science professor and counselor to leaders in Greece, the United States, and Asia. Notably, he was the first and only member of the Jimmy Carter administration to settle in Russia. This article was initially published at Dances with Bears.
When Donald Trump announced Starmer’s resignation, he aimed to take control of the narrative and, in doing so, resulted in a significant blow to the longstanding special relationship between the US and the UK. This shift also implies that British policies, both domestic and foreign, are veering into a colonial approach.
This marks a significant departure not seen in nearly two millennia since the days of the Roman Empire. Following Emperor Claudius’s proclamation of Britain as a province in 43 AD and Hadrian’s establishment of a defensive wall in 122 AD, Trump has pushed boundaries even further. Meanwhile, he has even constructed a golf course that sits a staggering 230 miles north of Hadrian’s Wall.
Contrary to Trump’s assertions, Starmer previously expressed the idea that the special relationship was still very much alive. In March, he stated, “We are working together in the region, the U.S. and the British working together to protect both the U.S. and the British in joint bases.” [Reuters]
However, it was clear that Trump had a different agenda in mind starting with his directives related to the Diego Garcia military base in February.
In a tweet, he claimed, “Our relationship with the United Kingdom is strong… but Prime Minister Starmer is losing control of this important Island,” warning against potential vulnerabilities with Iran. He insisted Starmer must not relinquish control over Diego Garcia, emphasizing that such a decision would tarnish the UK’s standing as a vital ally. “We will always be ready to fight for the U.K.,” he affirmed, urging a strong stance against “Wokeism” and other contemporary challenges.
The situation escalated as Trump publicly admonished Starmer for sending Peter Mandelson to Washington as ambassador, labeling the choice as a “really bad pick.” Later, with advice from his financial backers, Trump demanded Starmer’s resignation: “Keir Starmer will resign as Prime Minister of The United Kingdom. He failed badly on two very important subjects—IMMIGRATION AND ENERGY,” he stated, signaling the end of Starmer’s premiership.
Starmer’s exit has opened the floor for aspiring British politicians who seek to align themselves with Trump’s vision ahead of the upcoming elections. Polling data reflects a surprising shift, with Trump appearing more popular among voters than both Starmer and Nigel Farage, although still trailing behind former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.
Among the populace, King Charles III stands out with a significantly favorable approval rating. In a recent dialogue, Trump praised the monarch and announced plans to remove tariffs affecting the importation of Scottish whiskey, a gesture aimed at strengthening trade ties.
Starmer’s potential successor, Andrew Burnham, faces an uphill battle, starting with a low approval rating. Analysts predict he will be pressured to conform to Trump’s agenda, which includes bolstering UK defense spending and supporting military interventions.
In an environment where political favorability directly aligns with support for militaristic alliances, Burnham’s choices could define his political trajectory and the future of UK-US relations.
This ongoing saga invites deeper reflection on the dynamics of power and influence, making it evident that the consequences of this political shakeup will echo throughout international relations for years to come.
