Can Keir Starmer Succeed Where Macron Failed with Trump?
Will Keir Starmer Outshine Macron in Winning Trump’s Support for Ukraine?
On February 27, 2025, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer steps into the White House to meet U.S. President Donald Trump, just days after French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit on February 24 left European leaders disheartened. Macron’s attempts to secure concrete U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine were branded a “failure” by Politico, with sources calling the talks a “waste of time.” As Starmer takes his turn, the stakes couldn’t be higher—not just for Ukraine, but for the transatlantic alliance and Europe’s role in global security. Could Starmer succeed where Macron stumbled? Let’s explore the dynamics at play, the outcomes of Macron’s visit, and what Starmer brings to the table that might tip the scales.
Macron’s White House Disappointment: A Tough Act to Follow
Macron arrived in Washington with a clear mission: persuade Trump to back a European-led plan for Ukraine, potentially involving up to 30,000 peacekeepers to secure a ceasefire between Kyiv and Moscow. The French leader emphasized the need for “strong and credible security guarantees” to ensure a “lasting peace,” a sentiment echoed across European capitals rattled by Russia’s ongoing aggression. However, Trump remained noncommittal. According to Politico, Macron left without any firm promises, with Trump sticking to his stance that the European Union should shoulder the primary burden—both financially and militarily—for Ukraine’s stability.
Trump’s remarks post-meeting underscored his reluctance to overextend U.S. resources. “I’m not going to make security guarantees beyond very much,” he said, signaling that American troops won’t be boots on the ground in Ukraine. While Macron briefed EU counterparts via a rushed video call, the consensus was grim. An EU diplomat lamented the “strategic ambiguity” Trump maintained, while a senior official dismissed the talks as fruitless. The Wall Street Journal reported that Britain and France are mulling a peacekeeping force to protect Ukrainian infrastructure, but without U.S. support—be it logistics, intelligence, or air defense—the plan teeters on shaky ground.
Macron’s failure wasn’t just a diplomatic misstep; it reflected Trump’s broader “America First” pivot. He’s vocalized frustration over U.S. spending on Ukraine, even suggesting Washington should “get back” the money invested. This stance clashes with Europe’s push for a united front, leaving leaders like Macron scrambling to bridge the gap. As Starmer prepares to face the same challenge, the question looms: can he navigate Trump’s priorities differently?
Starmer’s Approach: A Blend of Pragmatism and Personal Diplomacy
Unlike Macron, who leaned heavily on grand appeals to European security, Starmer enters the White House with a reputation for pragmatism and a knack for building personal rapport—key assets when dealing with a mercurial figure like Trump. Their prior meeting in New York, a two-hour dinner at Trump Tower, reportedly ended on a high note, with Trump dimming the lights to showcase the Manhattan skyline. This personal touch could give Starmer an edge, especially since Trump has called him “a very nice guy,” a contrast to his more reserved praise of Macron as “a friend.”
Starmer’s strategy appears twofold: reinforce the UK-U.S. “special relationship” while subtly aligning Trump’s self-interest with European goals. Ahead of the visit, he’s signaled flexibility, acknowledging Trump’s push for NATO allies to boost defense spending. Speaking at the Scottish Labour conference, Starmer said, “It’s time to take responsibility for our security,” echoing Trump’s rhetoric—a move that could resonate with the U.S. president’s ego. The UK currently spends 2.3% of its GDP on defense, with Starmer pledging to hit 2.5%, a timeline he might clarify in Washington to show commitment.
On Ukraine, Starmer’s messaging aligns with Macron’s—supporting Kyiv’s sovereignty and a robust peacekeeping plan—but his delivery might differ. Where Macron’s verbosity reportedly irked Trump (a Whitehall source noted Trump “tunes out” when bored), Starmer’s advisers have urged brevity and flattery. By framing U.S. backing as a legacy-defining win for Trump, Starmer could tap into the president’s vanity, a tactic Macron underutilized. The Guardian reports Starmer aims to “play the man, as well as the ball,” ensuring Trump feels triumphant by the meeting’s end.
The Ukraine Stakes: Why It Matters
The backdrop to both visits is Ukraine’s precarious future. Three years into Russia’s invasion, a ceasefire remains elusive, and Trump’s overtures to Moscow—bypassing Kyiv—have alarmed European leaders. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has resisted a proposed $500 billion minerals deal with the U.S., which would cede half of Ukraine’s rare earth deposits without broader security assurances. Meanwhile, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned that unauthorized peacekeepers would be “legitimate targets,” heightening the risks of any European deployment.
Britain and France envision a “reassurance force” to safeguard Ukrainian facilities, but as The Economist notes, Zelensky sees little value without a U.S. “backstop.” Trump’s skepticism about NATO and his demand for Europe to “step up” complicate this vision. Macron’s pitch for U.S. logistical support fell flat, but Starmer might frame it differently—perhaps as a low-cost, high-impact way for Trump to assert dominance over Putin without direct military entanglement.
Starmer vs. Macron: Key Differences in Play
Several factors suggest Starmer could fare better than Macron in swaying Trump:
Personal Chemistry: Starmer’s prior rapport with Trump contrasts with Macron’s occasionally strained dynamic. Trump’s past irritation with Macron’s “lecturing” style (noted by The Guardian) could make Starmer’s concise, collegial approach more effective.
UK Leverage: The UK’s post-Brexit positioning as a bridge between the U.S. and Europe gives Starmer a unique angle. Unlike Macron, who speaks for a broader EU bloc, Starmer can pitch the UK as a nimble, reliable ally—bolstered by gestures like a rumored invitation from King Charles III for a state visit, per The Daily Telegraph.
Defense Spending Commitment: Starmer’s pledge to raise UK defense spending aligns with Trump’s NATO critiques, offering a tangible concession Macron didn’t match. France spends just over 2% of GDP on defense, and while Macron has urged a greater “war effort,” he lacks a specific timeline to appease Trump’s demands.
Tactical Flattery: Starmer’s team knows Trump thrives on praise. By crediting him with refocusing global attention on Ukraine—while nudging him toward support—Starmer might succeed where Macron’s policy-heavy pleas faltered.
Yet, challenges remain. Trump’s aversion to binding commitments and his focus on domestic priorities (like tariffs, which he’s threatened at 21% on European imports) could overshadow Starmer’s efforts. If Trump digs in, even the UK’s charm offensive might not shift his stance.
What Success Looks Like for Starmer
Success for Starmer doesn’t necessarily mean a full U.S. pledge for peacekeepers. Even a vague nod to logistical support—intelligence sharing or air defense—could bolster the European plan, giving Starmer a win Macron couldn’t secure. Alternatively, locking in Trump’s verbal assurance that any Ukraine deal won’t “embolden Putin” (a point Macron raised, per The Times) could frame Starmer as a steady hand in transatlantic talks.
The timing of Starmer’s visit—days after Macron’s—also offers an advantage. Having spoken with Macron on Sunday, February 23, Starmer can refine his pitch based on the Frenchman’s debrief, avoiding pitfalls and doubling down on what resonates with Trump. Downing Street’s cautious optimism, per The Guardian, suggests Starmer aims to “build on” Macron’s groundwork rather than repeat it.
The Verdict: Can Starmer Outdo Macron?
As of February 27, 2025, at 6:23 PM CET, Starmer’s meeting is underway, and real-time outcomes remain unclear. However, early indicators—his personal rapport, strategic concessions, and tailored approach—hint at a stronger chance of swaying Trump than Macron achieved. Web reports from Reuters and CNN note Starmer’s team is “cautiously hopeful,” contrasting with the dour mood post-Macron. If Starmer secures even a modest commitment, it could mark a diplomatic coup, reinforcing the UK’s clout and giving Europe a lifeline in Ukraine.
Macron’s visit exposed Trump’s reluctance, but it also set the stage for Starmer to play a different game. Whether he emerges as the leader who cracks Trump’s resolve—or just another European left grasping—will shape not just Ukraine’s fate, but the West’s unity in a turbulent era. For now, all eyes are on Washington, where Starmer’s pragmatism meets Trump’s unpredictability in a high-stakes showdown.
