Trump exposing his claws to Zelensky has resulted in both Starmer and Macron being seen as statesmen and have gained in popularity in their countries
By Mihir Bose
There is no knowing what Donald Trump will do. However, one thing nobody could have anticipated, not even Trump, was that he would rescue the political careers of Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron — talk of unexpected consequences.
To even narrate it seems extraordinary. Let us go back to that Friday on the last day of February when Donald Trump threw Zelensky out of the White House after scenes nobody expected to see in the Oval Office—at that stage, Macron, who has two years left in office, looked like a man that all France wanted out of the Elysee Palace.
As for Starmer he was the most unpopular Prime Minister in British history, his government having an opinion poll rating even below that of Nigel Farage’s Reform party. It is true that the previous day, Starmer had emerged from the Oval Office, all smiles, and Trump was full of praise for the British Prime Minister, saying he was worth every penny the British paid him. But that was due to Starmer, in effect, grovelling to Trump. Recall the meeting, which started with Starmer giving a letter to Trump from King Charles inviting Trump to a state visit to Britain. This, Starmer emphasised, would be unprecedented as no foreign leader had ever enjoyed a second state visit to Britain. This was a special relationship where Britain was definitely the junior partner kowtowing to its senior partner, America.
But the moment Trump showed his claws to Zelensky, making it clear that the Ukrainian leader had no cards to play and suggesting America would abandon Ukraine, the situation dramatically changed. That Sunday, Starmer called a summit of European leaders, and Zelensky was welcomed. He not only embraced Zelensky outside Downing Street but made it clear at the summit Zelensky had plenty of cards to play. Russia was the aggressor. What is more, Starmer got European leaders to agree to a “coalition of the willing” that would support Zelensky. Macron joined him in making clear that, unlike Trump, Zelensky was not being abandoned.
Now, these two European leaders knew that without American support, Nato collapses. Indeed, such is their concern that Trump may lead America out of Nato that they have gone out of their ways to show that they will increase defence spending as Trump wants. Nothing riles Trump more then American defence spending to maintain Nato being double that of almost every European country, barring Poland, and prior to his meeting with Trump, Starmer had made an announcement in the Commons of how Britain would be increasing its defence spending. He made much of this at his meeting with Trump who reacted as if this was a subject paying homage to his king. Before Starmer Macron had also visited Trump and paid his respects to the new sun king.
But here was Starmer and Macron, two days after the Oval office thrashing of Zelensky, in effect, defying the King and what is more showing every sign that they were enjoying it. The result has been both Starmer and Macron have suddenly been seen as statesman and gained in popularity in their countries. To an extent, Macron’s popularity does not matter and it is unlikely it will make much difference to the crisis he faces domestically. Having, three months ago, lost one Prime Minister in a historic vote of no-confidence, which ended the beleaguered and short-lived minority coalition of the right-wing Michel Barnier, he may yet lose his replacement, the veteran centrist Francois Bayrou. Even when he took office Bayrou said the tasks were so mountainous it was like politically climbing the Himalayas. He may not even get to base camp let alone the summit. His days could still be numbered, whatever Macron’s newfound status as a statesman and world leader.
What we could see, however, is Macron following the part of Charles De Gaulle who had always kept France distant from America. The French nuclear arsenal is not tied to America as Britain’s is and De Gaulle vetoed Britain’s bid to join what was then the European Common Market as he saw Britain as a trojan horse of America in the European community. France may have helped America gain independence from Britain two hundred and fifty years ago, but France has never talked of any special relationship with America, as the British have never stop doing, and if Macron distances France from America, he would be following a long-established French tradition.
However, Starmer becoming a world statesman is different. He has no desire to end the special relationship. Also, much more than Macron, nobody expected this man, who has looked a dour lawyer who struggles to string together a sentence, to become a statesman on whose every word the world waits. True, in the nine months in office he has made many foreign journeys but before his sudden emergence as world leader this was seen as collecting air miles rather than making any impression on world politics, let alone changing events.
All this, of course, is the reverse of what usually happens. Leaders, when they come to power are little known abroad. They are involved in domestic politics and gain an international reputation after they have been in office for several years. Then they are often more popular abroad than at home. I saw this with Tony Blair towards the end of his Prime Ministership in Singapore. He had gone there to secure London the 2012 Olympics against a background of being very unpopular at home because of his disastrous Iraq war. But in Singapore foreign leaders, and even the foreign public, could not get enough of him. Such was his aura that he secured Britain the Olympics beating the favourite France in the process.
For Starmer it is the exact opposite. Hailed in many parts of the world and even this country for his brilliant statesmanship his handling of domestic politics has made him so unpopular that it matches the dark days of John Major after Black Wednesday and the 1992 sterling crisis created by Britain joining the ERM. True, Starmer has four years to change things and restore his popularity. Even Rachel Reeves may prove a success and not the worst chancellor of the exchequer since Anthony Barber in the 1970s.
However, Starmer would do well to recall what happened to Major. Black Wednesday came shortly after Major had unexpectedly won the 1992 election and was riding high. But such was the impact of Black Wednesday that Major never recovered even though by the end of his Prime Ministership the economy was booming, and Tony Blair inherited a country that was doing well and not in the dire straits it is now, which Starmer never fails to remind us.
Starmer may find he has done the same for Nigel Farage. Farage could come to No 10 with the economy booming. Unlikely as this may seem, we live in strange, Trumpian times, and nothing should be ruled out. Starmer, the great world statesman, may prove to be the leader who never got his domestic politics right.
Mihir Bose is the author of ‘Thank You Mr. Crombie, Lessons in Guilt and Gratitude to the British’.
