Labour’s election meddling may have blown the UK’s chances of US free trade deal

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T

The last few weeks have seen lots of chatter about the prospects for a US-UK free trade deal under the forthcoming Trump administration. UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves is reportedly prioritising better trade ties as a potential fix for Britain’s economic growth woes. Labour figures have claimed that David Lammy has a good relationship with JD Vance, in a hint that he may have the juice to help deliver such an agreement as foreign secretary. 

Robert Greenway, former deputy assistant to the president on Trump’s National Security Council, also raised hopes for a deal, telling Politico: “I think it’s in both of our interests to do so”. There has also been speculation that Trump’s support for Brexit would dispose him favourably to a trade deal with a post-Brexit UK. 

Although there are concerns that Trump’s tariffs and the installation of vaccine and   pharmaceutical-sceptic Robert F Kennedy Jr   at the Department of Health and Human Services could end up hammering British drug-making giants, there is also a sense that, because the UK’s trade balance is far tighter, and largely centred on the services sector, it could dodge anti-trade measures under the new administration. Many have also argued – correctly, in my view – that Trump looks at the UK more favourably than President Biden does. (Trump’s mother emigrated to the United States from Scotland, and he owns plenty of property there).

And yet, Trump’s return to the presidency could also work out very badly for a Britain led by the Labour Party. Trump does indeed love tariffs and his administration will promulgate much less Big Pharma-friendly policy than Biden’s has. Labour also appears to have let go a key trade negotiator who might have actually been well-placed to get a deal over the finish line. 

But more concerning is the fact that the British Left writ large is likely to have irritated not just the Republican Party as a whole, but Trump in particular. And Trump has already demonstrated, over the course of his first four-year term, that he is prepared to use the levers of government to punish those he views as having tried to harm him – personally, in politics, and indeed in government and international affairs.

The   Labour Party sending personnel to turn voters  out for Kamala Harris ahead of this year’s presidential election was probably the stupidest thing the party could have done if it wanted to maintain its options for a cordial relationship with Trump.  

Yes, Sir Keir Starmer has been adamant that Labour staffers were doing so entirely on their  own time and their own dime , and so by implication the party did not fall foul of US law.  But even if that is technically true, it means members of the party of the sitting PM actively engaged to try to keep Trump out of office. He is unlikely to forgive and forget; he’s just not the type. 

And contrary to what many Brits might assume, US law on this subject is no joke. We keep on the books campaign finance rules that ban donations to any federal candidate or committee from anyone who is not a US citizen or green card holder. This is in addition to separate criminal laws against foreign interests intervening in the policy or political framework without full disclosure. 

This regime is referred to as FARA, or the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and it does indeed apply to political parties. If Labour hasn’t complied with the letter of the law – and the Department of Justice, which handles FARA, has been getting much more aggressive with enforcement of late, successfully convicting everyone from Pras Michel of Fugees fame to Sen Bob Menendez for violating it – it could mean real trouble.

This wouldn’t be the first time in recent years that FARA concerns have been raised about the influence of British figures obviously to the Left of your average American – to say nothing of Trump – either. 

In a report for  DC Journal  last year, concern was voiced that another UK political player, Baroness Kidron, and her nonprofit might have been in violation of FARA. Kidron has been active in pushing for social media regulation in the US, but according to that report her setup – at least as of summer 2023 – may not have been structured in a way that was obviously compliant with US law. 

Under Trump, such activities could face more scrutiny. Republicans have recently begun voicing big concerns about innocuous-sounding social media regulation of the kind that Kidron has promoted. 

Whether you agree with Republicans or not, it’s unlikely that legislation that is viewed by the social conservative wing of the party as a stealth mechanism for foisting pro-LGBT and pro-abortion content onto innocent youngsters will receive a favourable reception. And remember: Republicans will shortly control the presidency, the Senate and the House – in their (and others’) view, thanks to running attack ads focused on Democrats being too LGBT-friendly.

More directly tied to the push for such legislation is the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) – its STAR framework seems, per CCDH’s own claims, to be the basis for a key bill. CCDH will inevitably be criticised for attempting to import British or even European ideas into the US. It has consistently undertaken this work through a US corporation that has charitable tax status. The same is true of the Aspen Institute, through which Prince Harry has been arguing for more US-side social media regulation. 

But just because the CCDH and Aspen and Prince Harry may be on the right side of the law, that doesn’t mean they’ve got the optics remotely right for a Trump II world. No matter how much many Americans love  The Crown , gossip about the royals, or even cherish their access to British-company-manufactured pharmaceuticals, they really, really hate the notion of do-gooders from the country their forebears went to war to split from – especially those bearing titles – trying to tell them what US policy should look like. 

It has been suggested that, if the UK is serious about a free trade deal, Labour needs to get Nigel Farage to function as an emissary to Trump – and move away from ties with the EU in favour of a closer relationship with the US. It’s incredibly hard to see either thing happening, but for those who want a stronger political and economic relationship with America, they had better hope both occur. 

Either that or Starmer had better ask King Charles to host a lot of high teas and golf sessions with Trump personally to smooth things over.