When a British prime minister arrives in Washington, they usually have a clear idea of what to say and what to expect from their interlocutor. However, with Donald Trump, the rules don’t always apply. Keir Starmer, the UK’s leader, is about to face the most crucial moment of his mandate with a meeting at the White House with the US president. Although their encounter will be brief, every minute and gesture counts, especially during this tumultuous period marked by the war in Ukraine, which will shape not only the country’s future but also that of all Europe.
The leaders of the Old Continent have been alarmed by Trump’s apparent preference for engaging with Vladimir Putin over Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and his reluctance to acknowledge Russia as the aggressor. As a result, Starmer’s challenging task is to convince the US president that a fair and lasting peace is in his personal interest, and that this cannot be achieved if an agreement is imposed on Ukraine against its will. The UK is seeking security guarantees from Washington for a significant military operation and believes that any agreement must involve broader negotiations on European security, including a possible pact on conventional forces between NATO and Russia.
Europe is eager to have a seat at the negotiating table, but for now, Trump has been speaking only with Russia, choosing Saudi Arabia as a neutral territory. If he decides to include Europe, it’s unlikely that the continent will be given more than a single seat. Ukraine has asked Europe to unite behind a single name, and Starmer is now positioning himself as a transatlantic bridge. To pave the way, he announced a surprise increase in defense spending to 2.5% of GDP from April 2027, with the goal of reaching 3% in the next legislature, which he considers the largest sustained increase since the Cold War. This move is seen as a commitment to Trump, who has been making it clear that Europe cannot rely solely on US protection.
However, the “special relationship” between the UK and the US doesn’t seem to be a priority for the new US administration. Starmer has faced constant attacks from Elon Musk, now a close ally of Trump. Moreover, in his speech at the Munich Security Conference, US Vice President JD Vance stated that the danger to Europe comes not from Russia or China but from within, citing concerns about the erosion of freedom of expression, with a specific mention of the UK.
Progress on a potential free trade agreement between London and Washington is also unlikely. This pact was once a key promise made by Eurosceptics during the Brexit campaign and could have protected the UK in a potential tariff war. However, given Trump’s tough negotiation style and the Starmer government’s commitment not to compromise on food security regulations for US imports, such an agreement seems distant or even impossible to achieve.
Before his trip to Washington, Starmer spoke with French President Emmanuel Macron, who was cautiously optimistic after his meeting with Trump on Monday. Although there are still many points to advance, the White House tenant agreed to some form of American “support” for any potential future deployment of European forces to help maintain peace in Ukraine. However, the details of this support remain unclear.
For several weeks, the UK and France, Europe’s two nuclear powers, have been discussing options for forming a coalition of European and allied peace forces that could be sent in the event of a peace agreement acceptable to Ukraine. This would be part of a European security guarantee against future Russian aggression, but it could only be credible with American military and intelligence support. After Starmer’s visit to Washington, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will meet with Trump at the White House to close an agreement on minerals.
Ukraine is home to around 5% of the world’s “essential raw materials,” including 19 million tons of proven graphite reserves, which are used to manufacture batteries for electric vehicles. Trump has taken notice of this and has abandoned his initial demand for $500 billion in compensation for US support against the Russian military invasion. However, it’s clear that in the Trump era, American help comes with conditions attached.