What can Keir Starmer say at the White House that Donald Trump might listen to? | Andrew Rawnsley

For British prime ministers, with their ideas about the world shaped by the histories of Churchill and Roosevelt, Maggie and Ronnie, and the rest of the folklore about the transatlantic alliance, the prospect of a visit to the White House usually causes tingles of excitement. One of our senior diplomats once offered me an explanation of the allure: “The red carpet is laid out, the national anthems are played, all that stuff is very seductive.” This will be customarily accompanied by ritualistic words about the importance and invincibility of the “special relationship”.

Number 10 lobbied hard to get Sir Keir Starmer across the Atlantic early in the second term of Donald Trump and, until recently, Downing Street people were telling themselves that an encounter between the two men needn’t be a disaster and might even turn out to be a success. In the weeks since Trump’s re-election as US president, UK policy might be summarised by the phrase “Don’t poke the beast”. Keep the temperature cool. Ignore provocations. Attempt to trade on British heritage – golf, the royal family – with which this US president has an affinity. Put David Lammy out there to suggest that there is lots to respect about the man whom the foreign secretary used to call a “woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath”. Softly-softly was the doctrine and they thought it was bearing fruit.

While a fusillade of blistering Trump attacks have been launched against other countries – among them places as various as Canada, Denmark, Mexico and Panama – the UK has so far avoided being whacked. While trade threats have been made against China, the EU and America’s neighbours, ministers still hope the UK has a fair chance of dodging the tariff bullet. They were rather pleased with themselves at Number 10 when, a few weeks ago, the US president called Sir Keir “a very good person” who has done “a very good job thus far”. Perhaps, they told themselves in Downing Street, it was going to be OK.

Nobody sentient in Number 10, the Foreign Office or the Ministry of Defence is relaxed now. Not after what has been unleashed over the past 10 days. As a doctrine, “Don’t poke the beast” only worked for so long as the beast chose not to bite off your leg regardless.

Sir Keir, less than eight months into his term and still a relative novice in geopolitics, is flying to America this week with transatlantic relations smashed up like they have never been before. Although it is not his fault, the haunting thought for him is that the alliance forged during the Second World War is disintegrating on his watch. The first swing of the wrecking ball was Trump’s declaration that he had initiated land-for-peace negotiations with Vladimir Putin over the heads of Kyiv and the European members of Nato. That ambush has been followed by the US secretary of state meeting his Russian opposite number in Saudi Arabia with Ukraine uncordially uninvited to have any say about its fate.

In a deeply disturbing speech to the Munich security conference, the vice-president, JD Vance, trolled Europe by questioning whether the continent’s values were worth defending, before holding a taboo-busting meeting with the leader of the far-right AfD on the eve of the German elections. We have since heard the US president falsely brand Volodymyr Zelenskyy “a dictator” and baselessly blame Ukraine’s democratically elected leader for the war that has ravaged his country. No one should really need reminding that the conflict was started three years ago by the barbaric Russian invasion intended to extinguish its smaller neighbour as an independent state. The span of the UK political spectrum has rejected the US president’s regurgitation of risible Kremlin propaganda, which attempts to shift culpability from the aggressor to the victim. Even Nigel Farage, usually an unashamed cheerleader and apologist for Trumpery, has had to say he can’t go along with that. Sir Keir was quick to repudiate the attack and call President Zelenskyy to express his support. Says one member of the cabinet: “Keir has been quite ballsy about that.”

One question accompanying the prime minister across the Atlantic is how “ballsy” he is prepared to be when he is up close and personal with the US president. Should Trump repeat his smears about Ukraine, the prime minister will have a choice to make. If he responds meekly or mutely, it will be at the great risk of looking pathetically pusillanimous. If he calls it out as a calumny, it will be at the serious peril of making himself the target of the fiery wrath of this thin-skinned and vindictive US president.

That’s just one of the jeopardies of a visit pregnant with hazard. Another danger is that Sir Keir is greeted with a flat rebuff when he attempts to convince the American that Europe must have a role in negotiations and Ukraine has to be “kept in the fight” to strengthen the west’s hand with the Russians. Some in the UK government contend that the odds on making headway could be a bit better than they look. “A lot of commentary is jumping way ahead of itself,” says a senior figure closely involved in the preparations for the visit. “The Trump administration is still settling down. Even hard-declared positions change 24 hours later. There are multiple voices competing for Trump’s ear.”

Number 10 has spent a lot of time wondering how to make the voice of the prime minister persuasive enough to influence US policy. Trying to talk up Sir Keir as a “bridge” between America and Europe sounds vainglorious. This US president doesn’t see a bridge without wanting to blow it up. European leaders baulk at the idea of the UK representing itself as an interlocutor, especially since we are no longer a member of the EU. There’s more sense in coordination with Emmanuel Macron, whose trip to Washington will precede Sir Keir’s, to marshal the argument that Europe can’t be excluded from decisions that critically effect the security of its own continent. Another task for the prime minister is to challenge the view, held by some in the Trump circle, that the US will profit from a deal with Putin because it will break the Russia-China alliance.

I’m told that the prime minister will contend to the president that leaving Europe insecure will undermine the strategic position of the US because it will embolden aggressive moves by China and strengthen Beijing’s ties with Moscow, exactly the opposite of what Washington wants. Sir Keir will also make the case that Europe is now heeding Trump on taking more responsibility for its own security.

“We’ve got to say to the US: ‘We hear you’,” says one senior minister. “We know we must do more, more quickly.” To the ears of the president, this is likely to sound feeble unless it is backed by something firmer than a promise to raise British defence spending to 2.5% of GDP at some unspecified date in the future, which is half the 5% of GDP that Trump has lately taken to demanding.

Intelligence-gleaning should be a priority for the prime minister and his team during their time in Washington. Listening to Trump and his courtiers will be at least as important as speaking. Precisely what kind of deal do the Americans think they can land with the Kremlin? That would be worth knowing, even if the answer turns out to be a scary one. Forewarned is forearmed. The truth may very well be that members of the Trump regime haven’t settled upon or don’t agree among themselves about their desired endpoint.

Diplomats reckon that there is one approach with the greatest potential to have traction on this occupant of the Oval Office. That is to appeal to his ego and self-interest with the warning that a dirty carve-up of Ukraine on the Kremlin’s terms will project Putin as the apex predator and leave the US president looking like a weak dupe. Kim Darroch, a former UK ambassador to the US, suggests: “If I were Starmer, I would say to Trump that this is your chance for your place in history, the man who brought peace and ended this war. But it has to be a fair deal. If it’s a bad deal, you are not going to get that praise, you are going to get a load of criticism and that will be your record in the history books.”

Vanity is one of the more reliable traits of Donald Trump. Leaning into his narcissism may be undignified, but it may also be essential if Sir Keir is to come home from Washington with anything that he can call a success.