US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath.
For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House meeting, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Trump reaffirmed their commitment to maintaining it.
The strategic partnership has been a cornerstone of Britain’s foreign and security policies since 1946, when former British prime minister Winston Churchill, in a landmark speech in Fulton, Missouri, famously warned that “an Iron Curtain has descended” across Europe.
Illustration: Mountain People
In what was arguably the most consequential speech in Britain’s post-World War II history, Churchill maintained that “neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organization, will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples.”
To that end, “a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States” was essential, he said.
Admittedly, that relationship has always mattered far more to the UK than to the US. Over the years, it has rested on the UK’s ostensibly independent nuclear deterrent, extensive intelligence sharing, military cooperation and a shared approach to global threats. For many — including myself — it has also been defined by deep affection, gratitude and admiration.
My lifelong involvement in domestic and international politics has been shaped by an early political baptism in the US, making me an avowed Americanophile. That is why it is so painful to see a US administration fall so far short of the values that Washington has long championed.
Since Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech, the US-UK relationship has been regarded as the linchpin of the Western-led liberal order. As its undisputed leader, the US has long served as a model for open societies worldwide.
Churchill’s vision of an open society was built on a shared commitment to democratic governance, the rule of law, judicial independence, and resistance to tyranny and oligarchy. It emphasized civility in political life; recognized the moral duty to help the world’s poor and oppressed; and championed the establishment of international organizations dedicated to maintaining world peace, along with defensive alliances committed to upholding international law and self-determination. Crucially, open societies depended on strong economic partnerships, rejecting the kind of protectionism that fueled the Great Depression.
While Trump occasionally echoes long-standing US policies, no US president has ever played as fast and loose with American values and interests. It is impossible to imagine any of his predecessors inciting an attack on the country’s democratic institutions over fabricated claims of election fraud or pardoning those who stormed the US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Likewise, no US president — with the exception of Richard Nixon — used the presidency to exact revenge on their rivals. None of them would have handed a billionaire oligarch like Elon Musk free rein to fire federal workers and dismantle the US’ foreign-aid programs. And none was entangled in a web of commercial conflicts of interest as vast and complex as Trump’s.
Certainly, no US president in the past 70 years would have offered Ukraine to Russian President Vladimir Putin on a silver platter, let alone demanded that the Ukrainians hand over their mineral riches to the US.
Given this reality, Starmer must ask himself whether the UK and Trump’s America still share any values. At the very least, Britain must refuse to be complicit in Trump’s malign policies. That does not mean that the UK should be hostile toward its longtime ally, but it must not debase itself by yielding to Trump’s every demand.
To mitigate this danger, British policymakers must take four key steps:
First, to maintain credibility on Ukraine and address the threat posed by Russian aggression, they must boost defense spending — as Starmer already plans to do — despite the UK’s fiscal constraints. They should also collaborate with NATO-aligned EU member states to establish a European rearmament bank.
Second, although Brexit prevents the UK from leading efforts to secure Ukraine’s accession to the EU, it should aim to replicate any economic or trade benefits Ukraine gains from EU membership. Policymakers must heed the lesson of the 1930s: Appeasing bullies only emboldens them.
Third, British policymakers must remind their US allies that no country — not even a superpower — can make itself safe by focusing exclusively on rival major powers. History shows that great-power conflicts often originate in smaller states. Consider Serbia before World War I, Czechoslovakia and Poland before World War II and Manchuria in the 1930s.
As Mark Twain famously put it: “God created war so that Americans would learn geography.”
Fourth, the US could use a reminder of the importance of soft power. Strength alone does not inspire genuine support; when a country is viewed as relying on coercion to maintain its dominance, the long-term consequences are likely to be costly.
A Canadian friend once told me he dreads having his accent mistaken for an American one, lamenting that he could not find a lapel pin that reads: “Don’t blame me; I’m from Canada.”
I still admire the history, culture and values of the US, but with Trump in power, I am glad my accent sets me apart.
Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is chancellor of the University of Oxford.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
RSS