Concern over Starmer’s airmiles as problems multiply at home

None of Keir Starmer’s top priorities for government – his “six steps” unveiled to voters during the election campaign – involve foreign policy.

Yet few things have drawn on the Prime Minister’s time since taking office as much as international affairs. Global challenges have ranged from raging conflict in the Middle East and Ukraine, growing fears of Russia and other hostile states waging a “hybrid war” against the west, to resetting relations with Europe, preparations for the incoming Trump administration, seemingly endless global summits and the increasingly messy business of the Chagos Islands deal.

As a result, Starmer has undertaken almost as much travel in his first five months in office as Tony Blair did in his frenetic shuttle diplomacy after the September 11 attacks in 2001, analysis by The i Paper reveals.

The Prime Minister has been on 14 trips abroad to 10 different countries since 5 July, comparable with Blair’s 15 trips to 13 countries in the five months after 9/11, when he was helping to build an international coalition to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The international demands on Starmer’s time – and his overnight bag – have triggered some fears inside Labour and Whitehall that the Prime Minister is being distracted from the domestic agenda and the Government’s core priorities of economic growth, the NHS and migration.

One Government source said the PM had “rather overdone it” when it comes to international trips, and questioned whether there were times when Foreign Secretary David Lammy or Defence Secretary John Healey could have gone instead. Both men have undertaken their own foreign travel, including to Ukraine, Europe and China.

But the source said: “There’s plenty he could have sent Lammy or Healey too. He wasn’t needed at every one he went to.”

Allies of Starmer insist this spell of intense diplomatic activity is necessary because the previous Conservative government neglected the UK’s standing on the world stage.

And they argue that boosting Britain abroad is key to the government’s core domestic priorities.

A Labour insider said: “The problem is that Johnson, Truss and Sunak were totally uninterested in our international relationships, so Keir’s got a lot of catching up to do.

“If you look at the big ambitions of this Government – securing our borders, economic growth through trade, and climate goals and green investment – they all rely on Britain’s place in the world. You can’t just separate the government’s agenda into global and domestic.”

Another Government source said: “Foreign policy is key to our domestic agenda – whether it’s migration, with Yvette [Cooper] in Iraq, or particularly economic growth.

“There’s a certain element of a new PM having to get out there.”

Luke Sullivan, Starmer’s former political director, agreed. He said: “The Prime Minister’s foreign trips have all been crucial to global security and the UK’s prosperity, whether that be at the G20 or CHOGM [the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting], showing global leadership on climate change at COP, or meeting with President Biden and his national security team in the White House.

“When so much of our domestic security and prosperity relies on international trade and our alliances, it is right that the Prime Minister engages with our international partners.

“Those criticising the Prime Minister for doing his job are simply not serious people and don’t understand the interconnected nature of global issues, border security and domestic prosperity – all of which Keir, as Prime Minister, is leading on.”

While Starmer has been forced to juggle both domestic and international agendas, there have been personnel problems to deal with back home.

Turbulence inside Downing Street, with the departure of his chief of staff Sue Gray after a power struggle with Morgan McSweeney, who now has that job, has not helped the smooth running of the Government.

The resignation on Friday of former Transport Secretary Louise Haigh over a spent conviction related to her mobile phone happened within hours of the story breaking. But there will be questions for the PM about how much he knew of the allegations that Haigh made multiple claims about lost phones.

And in contrast to the time spent by the PM on international affairs, there are now no foreign policy special advisers in Downing Street, following the departure of John Bew in September, Donjeta Miftari last month, and this week the former Foreign Office diplomat Laura Hickey, who had been Bew’s replacement.

The i Paper understands that Jonathan Powell, Starmer’s new national security adviser, will be a key figure at the heart of No 10 on foreign policy, and will help marry up both domestic and international agendas.

A Government source said Powell, who previously served as Blair’s chief of staff in Downing Street, is seen as atypical to Civil Service veterans like his predecessor Sir Tim Barrow. And other diplomats are proving influential on the world stage precisely because Starmer has a mandate for big changes domestically.

“People are drawn to him [Powell] as they know he’s not going anywhere. This is a Government with a big majority and a mandate.”

The departure of Hickey suggests that No 10 is trying to take a more robust approach on some international issues, such as the Middle East, which are seen as being stuck in a Foreign Office mindset.

The UK traditionally – under different governments – takes an approach of “critical friend” to Israel, but some in Whitehall, and Tel Aviv, see the Foreign Office as more critic than friend.

Israeli officials are concerned that they still do not have a clear answer from the UK on whether Benjamin Netanyahu will be arrested, under the terms of the International Criminal Court’s warrant, if he attempts to land on British soil.

Lammy suggested to the foreign affairs committee this week that the Israeli PM would be, despite No 10 claiming it would be a matter for the UK courts.

But Israel has tempered its response to this equivocation because of what it sees as the larger and more pressing issue of Iran, where it is more closely aligned with the UK. London and Tel Aviv are also on the same page when it comes to Lebanon and the ceasefire agreed this week with Hezbollah.

It is without question that addressing the growing and increasingly allied threat of Russia, Iran, North Korea and China will be one of Powell’s top priorities.

However the issue of the Chagos Islands deal with Mauritius – which was negotiated by Powell – threatens to be an ongoing headache in the run-up to Donald Trump’s return in White House in January.

The i Paper understands that it is likely that Trump would have to go against the advice of US security services, the Department of State, and the Pentagon if he tried to rip up the Chagos deal, while there is an expectation that the new Mauritian PM will honour the political joint statement agreed under his predecessor.

But there has been concern in Whitehall that the Government failed to sufficiently communicate the deal, allowing it to become a part of the Tory leadership campaign and to be seized upon by Nigel Farage, an ally of Trump, to criticise the Government.

Labour MPs have been eager for Starmer to try and focus on the areas in which he is more likely to succeed with Trump.

“If you’re looking for silver linings, we know that Trump was a big supporter of Brexit, and while suggestions that we might be able to renegotiate a US trade deal are a bit of a stretch, I don’t think we are badly placed,” one backbencher said.

“It’s just about picking a few things where we can cooperate, and trying to limit [our] disagreements to the things that really matter, like Ukraine.

“Obviously, if there was going to be some sort of trade war, that would push us to cooperate much more closely with the EU.”

The MP added that there are areas that the PM cannot avoid, even if it means clashing with the Trump administration.

“The Middle East, and how that fall out goes, is going to be really difficult, because it’s increasingly clear what the plans are for Northern Gaza, in particular.

“That for my constituents is one of the main things that people write to me about – their continued horror, the UNRWA vote, and so on.

“We can’t avoid those disagreements, because we also have to be on the right side of history. I would say on foreign policy that is where it’s tricky. I think there might be more pragmatic conversations on trade and some other areas of cooperation.”

But will any of this frenzied diplomatic activity bring Starmer any electoral capital? It is unlikely.

Chris Hopkins, director of Savanta, said: “It is definitely of benefit for prime ministers to look assured and statesmanlike on the world stage, but the idea that anything Keir Starmer does globally is a vote winner is probably false. In fact, it’s far easier for prime ministers to lose voters with foreign affairs gaffes than it will ever be to win them.

“The task for the rest of Starmer’s premiership is to prove to voters domestically that his global grandstanding has some benefit to the issues they care most about, and how a generally safer world through the UK’s global leadership can have positive economic impacts that can be more keenly felt on these isles.”