Trump and the Tories: a warning

As New Hampshire appears to be yet another step along the road to the Republican nomination for Donald Trump, it’s worth a look at the growing number of Conservative Party voices validating his journey and looking forward to his return to the White House.

At first glance there would seem to be little in common between even those Conservatives of a certain disposition and a democracy threatening, election verdict denying, authoritarian insurrectionist. But the views of senior politicians in the UK, including it seems two former PMs, should not be passed over as just so much political flotsam.

I learned early not to underestimate the impact of Trump amongst serious people. I recall a visit to Parliament shortly after Trump’s legitimate win in 2016 by a senior Gulf figure, who pointed out the state of the unsettled region after eight years of Obama, and challenged our sceptical assumptions by stating it was fair that Trump had his chance.

Easy derision about a man elected by the American people as President from those of us who support a democratic process is not appropriate, so arguments deserve honest scrutiny. Take three. Jacob Rees Mogg claims Trump would be “better disposed” toward the UK than President Biden, who has “shown his dislike for the UK throughout his Presidency”.

Liz Truss endorsed the Republicans in November 2023, though not Trump by name. However, she had previously stated that Trump was “very good”, and she has a warm relationship with the Heritage Foundation, the self-styled shock troops of Trump’s second coming.

More recently Boris Johnson picked on Trump’s foreign policy as something that the world needed. The former Prime Minister suggested that his unpredictability and willingness to use force is “a major deterrent to the enemies of the West”.

But up to now, that’s as far as it goes in terms of considered arguments for Trump. None of these in my view stands up, nor outweighs the balance on the other side of the political ledger that prominent Conservative figures ought to bear in mind.

There is no evidence that Trump thinks any more of the UK than any other President properly would. He obviously likes Nigel Farage, but that’s not really enough. Whilst he was in office, the much sought after trade deal between the US and the UK, promoted as a key benefit of leaving the EU, and predicated to a degree on this “friendship”, got nowhere, just as now. That’s because Trump, as any President, puts the US first, and he knows an imbalance of bargaining power and supplication when

he sees it. He is a self-proclaimed protectionist. Which bit of “Make America GreatAgain” is ambiguous? I fail to see why leaders of an historic political party, based on centuries of democratic principles, can give house room to Trump, let alone see him as “great”.His past is bad enough, including his failure to accept the result of the 2020 election despite multiple failed attempts to overturn it by litigation. Then there is his perceived incitement to insurrection, now subject to multiple court actions. But Trump has also made no secret of ensuring that he intends to avoid checks and balances in the future by drawing up plans to remove any semblance of independence from government employees, and ruling when he wishes by Executive Order. Moreover, he has been ambiguous about the degree to which he would seek to inflict “retribution” (his word) on those who wronged him in the past. Conservatives should be wary of admiration. He’s neither a fool nor a joke — he is dangerous to democracy at home and abroad.

Elements of his foreign policy did attract broader Western support, such as being more direct with China, and being prepared to use force in targeted attacks against Iranian or Assad’s Syrian interests – not inconsequential actions. But other aspects were profoundly harmful. The threat to withdraw the US from NATO is not idle. What part did or does such uncertainty play in Putin’s plans for Ukraine, or even the Baltic states? The withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with Iran confounded the other partners to the plan, left Iran with no check on upgrading its uranium and destroyed the credibility of those in Iran who had negotiated the deal, to the delight of the IRGC and harder liners who took power as a consequence. We are still paying the price.

And whilst proclaiming himself the best President for Israel ever, his “deal of the century” left the Palestinians with nothing, and his ambassador to the country fuelled a sense of impunity on the Israeli right. Neither of these actions was helpful in a volatile context.

And Boris Johnson of all people may be unwise to trust Trump over Ukraine. When the former President says he will end the war in a day, it is unlikely to be with the defeat of an aggressor who stole territory and may have sights set elsewhere.

Before pronouncing further on what a second Trump presidency would mean for the UK, Conservative politicians might also ponder why a number of those senior figures who in government were closest to him and his administration before are warning about him now.

I know whose voices I’d rather listen to.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.