Keir Starmer’s onstage snub will hurt – I should know

There was something schoolboy-like about the sight of Starmer waddling up to the podium only to be turned away by Donald Trump, says Samuel Fishwick – but perhaps there are prizes to be had for participation

When I was 10, I was awarded an assembly prize at school, or so I thought. “Sam, come up to the stage,” said the headmaster, and up I trotted, beaming. “Not that Sam,” said the head hastily. “The other one.” And so I hung around awkwardly and clapped dutifully, and everyone pointed and laughed, while I filed it away in my big book of grievances and later bought a packet of Wotsits to cheer myself up.

Unedifying snubs like this are becoming an unfortunate habit for Keir Starmer around Donald Trump. On Monday, the PM went to Egypt to fly the flag for Britain at Trump’s hours-long Gaza peace plan signing ceremony.

“Where is the United Kingdom?” Trump asked at the lectern, swivelling theatrically.

“Behind you, as usual…” said Starmer, before striding forward a few paces to shake Trump’s hand, grinning, apparently ready to speak at the podium.

“Is everything going good?” Trump asked Starmer, who replied, “Very good.”

Then, as realisation dawned awfully on Starmer’s face, and caught by the world’s cameras – which are only somewhat less glaring than a room full of 10-year-old schoolboys – the president said, “It’s very nice that you’re here”, before, with the air of someone who has just forgotten why he walked into a room, he turned away from the PM and back to important matters, like praising the beauty of Italy’s PM, Giorgia Meloni.

Presumably, Starmer didn’t run off to the bathroom and cry as I did, but you never know. I cannot remember if the headmaster praised the beauty of “the other Sam”, but for legal reasons, I expect not.

Donald Trump has praised Keir Starmer a few times, but what is the real nature of their friendship? (PA)

What makes matters even worse than the playground optics is that Britain had spent 48 hours firefighting the assertion – from the US ambassador to the Middle East, Mike Huckabee, on X/Twitter – that Labour’s education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, was “delusional” for claiming that Britain had been a leading player behind the scenes in negotiating the peace deal. Envoy Steve Witkoff, who actually did negotiate the deal, posted later to praise the UK’s “vital role” – but this won’t have helped much.

This is not the first time that the PM has been made to look a fool in front of Trump. At the G7 summit in June, when a folder containing the president’s papers spilled out onto the floor, Starmer fell to his knees to scoop up their newly signed-off UK–US trade deal. A certain amount of back-slapping and bonhomie is welcome when a country like ours is punching above its size, but at times, Starmer is borderline butler-like.

Does Trump actually know Starmer’s name? Much has been made of the surprisingly warm relationship behind the “unlikely duo”, with White House officials – including Witkoff – describing the relationship as respectful. Given their political inclinations, the administration had not expected such a positive relationship.

Trump may indeed, as we’re often told, actually “like and respect” Starmer as an international statesman who has made an effort to reach out to him despite their differences in political philosophy. But while Trump keeps rescuing Starmer from international humiliation at a political level, it is impossible to ignore that, personally, the latter is prepared to present as more bag-carrier than statesman.

It is true that Trump has ridden to the PM’s rescue. He did so with the flawed Chagos Islands deal; in allowing Peter Mandelson to be the ambassador to the US despite warnings over his China and Jeffrey Epstein links; by giving the UK the first trade deal; and with public pronouncements on what a strong negotiator and good man Starmer is. But, as The Independent’s political editor David Maddox has said, that is more to do with the US administration’s position that they “cannot allow Britain to fail” because “it needs one ally to succeed to justify the president’s approach to foreign policy”.

Positively butler-like: Starmer stooping to pick up Trump’s papers in June at the G7 Summit (PA)

And so we have this awkward but illustrative accident of political circumstance. Starmer is valued not for what he brings to the table but for what he caters to it by a president who sees himself as the main event. It is a humiliating byproduct of this “deal politik”, like talking to someone at a party only to have them look over your shoulder and say, “Excuse me, but I have to go over there…”

This is, of course, the difference: when you are prime minister of Great Britain, you cannot burst into tears when someone snubs you. If he looked like a schoolboy who had wandered onto the wrong stage, so be it. There are prizes to be handed out for participation. Perhaps he can console himself with a packet of Wotsits.