The UK puts more store on its relationship with the US than any other European country. The “transatlantic alliance” is the keystone of its defense and security strategy. The City of London and Wall Street are intertwined. Academics and students shuttle between US and British universities. A Briton edits the US’s leading business newspaper, the Wall Street Journal. Board a plane from London to New York and you discover that Winston Churchill’s union of the English-speaking peoples is still alive.
So the British establishment is reeling at the news that US president-elect Donald Trump is back in the White House, with a Republican-dominated Senate and a majority in the popular vote as well as the Electoral College. UK Prime Minister and Labour Party leader Keir Starmer was quick to phone the disruptor-in-chief with his congratulations, but there is no doubt that he would have preferred a Kamala Harris victory.
This is not just because Labour and the Democrats are sister parties, sharing ideas and personnel. The Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves modeled her economic strategy (“securonomics”) on Joe Biden’s original, and Labour Party activists decamped to the US to campaign for Harris. It is also because Trump stands for everything that the Labour Party loathes — deporting undocumented immigrants, machismo, and, in their view, racism. In his days as a backbench MP, the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, denounced Trump as “a KKK” and a “Nazi” and pledged that, if he comes to the UK, “I will be out there protesting.”
A normal president might put all of this down to the rough-and-tumble of political life. However, Trump is not a forgive-and-forget type of guy, and he combines a thin skin with a shrewd ability to use “offense” to unbalance his opponents. Trump launched legal action against Labour activists for interfering in the US election (the activists had made the mistake of coordinating with Labour Party officials).
The wider British political sphere is also nonplussed by the Trump victory. Lord William Hague, a former leader of the Conservative Party and current candidate for the chancellorship of Oxford University, wrote in The Times on Tuesday that Trump was “a serious danger” and “the approach of midnight.” “Whatever our past affiliations,” he concluded, “we should all be Democrats.”
The only people who have a close relationship with Trump are on the periphery of British politics: Nigel Farage, of course, the leader of Reform, who celebrated Trump’s victory at Mar-a-Lago; former prime ministers Boris Johnson and Liz Truss; and a handful of members of the UK Parliament such as the former home secretary Suella Braverman. However, these few are of no use to the UK government. Can we really expect Starmer to use Farage as a Trump whisper (or British ambassador to Washington, as Farage would dearly like)? The British establishment would have fewer friends in Washington, DC, when Trump takes office in January than it has had since the Second World War.
It is impossible to say whether Trump would deliver on his promises to strike a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Ukraine or withdraw from NATO. A dealmaker rather than an ideologue, Trump is nothing if not inconsistent. If Trump withdraws the US’s support for Ukraine, it would frustrate the main object of the UK’s foreign policy for the past few years, which has been to resist aggression in the East. If he withdraws from NATO, it would frustrate one of the main objects of British foreign policy since 1949, when the organization was formed.
However, even if these drastic results are avoided, the UKs special transatlantic relationship would cool. There would be none of the common sympathy that characterized the Biden years (and would have characterized the Harris years). Instead, Trump’s team might well treat British officials as spiritual extensions of the Democratic Party, as Hague implied. Trump would expect the British, like the rest of the Europeans, to spend more on defense, and quickly. He would also shift much of his attention away from “processes” to deal-making, and away from Europe to the rest of the world.
Trump’s unpredictability also makes it impossible to know if he would impose tariffs on the UK and the rest of Europe and if so, how high they would be. Still, tariffs or not, he would pursue an expansionist economic policy of reducing personal and corporate taxes, rolling back the regulatory state, and running the economy hot. This would almost certainly attract a great deal of talent and capital from the UK, particularly as the Labour Party is raising taxes and squeezing the rich. Why stay in Starmer’s socialist-leaning London when you can enjoy a warm welcome in Trump’s New York?
The UK has often been lucky in its timing when it comes to the special relationship. The Thatcherite Conservatives forged close bonds with the Reagan Republicans in the 1980s, and the Middle-Way Blairites forged equally close bonds with the Clintonites in the 1990s. For a while it looked as if this trick would be repeated when the UK’s vote for Brexit was followed by the US’s vote for Trump in 2016. Trump marched hand-in-hand with “Britain’s Trump,” Boris Johnson, and promised a “beautiful trade deal” to solidify the Brexit revolution and confound the EU. However, it was not to be: Johnson lacked administrative skill, Covid functioned as a massive distraction and Trump lost the 2020 election.
This time round, the timing could hardly be worse for the UK. Trump has no chemistry with Starmer, a human rights lawyer turned public prosecutor. The Labour Party has no interest in a Brexit-flavored transatlantic trade deal. The UK is now more isolated than it has been since the glorious isolation of the Victorian era: Downgraded in Europe because it has left the EU, and no warm ties with MAGA America.
Adrian Wooldridge is the global business columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. A former writer at The Economist, he is author of The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern World. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
Republican candidate and former US president Donald Trump is to be the 47th president of the US after beating his Democratic rival, US Vice President Kamala Harris, in the election on Tuesday. Trump’s thumping victory — winning 295 Electoral College votes against Harris’ 226 as of press time last night, along with the Republicans winning control of the US Senate and possibly the House of Representatives — is a remarkable political comeback from his 2020 defeat to US President Joe Biden, and means Trump has a strong political mandate to implement his agenda. What does Trump’s victory mean for Taiwan, Asia, deterrence
The Taipei District Court on Nov. 1 agreed to extend the detention of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for his suspected involvement in corruption involving a real-estate project during his time as Taipei mayor. Different voices are beginning to emerge from within the TPP about how to respond to their extended leaderless situation. Following a string of scandals coming to light since early August, including the TPP’s misreporting of election campaign finances and Ko’s alleged corruption related to the Core Pacific City redevelopment project, Ko on Aug. 29 announced he would take a three-month leave of absence from
RSS