Taking Back Control: Democracy in a Changing World

In a press conference on Tuesday, Starmer repeated the classic line about the UK not having to choose between two old allies, the United States and Europe. Both are important, Starmer claims, and Britain shouldn’t make the “historic mistake” of picking a side.

The Prime Minister’s apparent belief is that Trump can be placated with a defence spending hike, meeting the President’s demand for Europe (including the UK) to lessen its reliance on American military support. Starmer’s hike, which is being paid for by drastic cuts to foreign aid, was welcomed by US Defence Secretary (and former Fox News anchor) Pete Hegseth.

Broadly, Starmer and Foreign Secretary David Lammy seem eager to please the Trump administration – reports suggest that the President will be invited for a stay at Balmoral Castle in the coming months.

But where Starmer has signalled a clear commitment to supporting Ukraine, advocating for seizing Russian assets and arguing that any negotiations with Russia must include the nation which was invaded, the US has forged a different path.

In addition to spreading a litany of falsehoods about President Zelenskyy, the United States has sided with Russia in two key votes at the United Nations (alongside just 16 other countries, with even China abstaining), and originally put forward an extortionate deal demanding rare earth minerals from Ukraine (which has now been adapted to a joint development of mineral deposits and approved by both parties).

Pictured: How United Nations members voted on Monday on a resolution for a “comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine” – the motion acknowledged Russia’s invasion and notes the importance of preserving Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

On Thursday, Starmer will attempt to convince Trump to continue supporting the defence of Ukraine. Trump has consistently voiced his disdain for NATO, threatening to pull out repeatedly. More recently, his officials have made clear that Europe should not depend on the United States for defence. I won’t make predications on future events – but even if Starmer was a uniquely gifted statesman, it would be a tough sell.

While you wouldn’t necessarily know it listening to the Prime Minister, the “special relationship” between US and UK has possibly never been more strained than it is today.

Polls show that a majority of Britons now favour Europe over America as an ally. Others polls show that the public increasingly regrets Brexit. Other polls still demonstrate that the British public has a deep distaste for Donald Trump.

All of this puts Starmer in a precarious position. He is attempting to balance the UK’s long-standing security and economic relationship with the United States (which is currently subject to the whims of Trump’s chaotic foreign policy) against a European alliance that is growing in importance, both geopolitically and in the minds of the British public. In essence, he has to solidify a new position for Britain in a rapidly shifting global order, one where both the EU and the US could be subject to significant changes in leadership.

But there is a deeper issue at play – one that goes beyond any single foreign policy dilemma.

Democracy itself is at a crossroads, both in Britain and beyond. Trump’s oligarchic coup in the United States is a warning sign for the UK. If Britain wants to navigate a world where the US is – for the foreseeable future at least – no longer a reliable democratic partner, it must strengthen its own political institutions at home.

Instead of kissing Donald Trump’s ring and seeking to placate a MAGA-infused American regime that views the world only in terms of power and profit, Starmer should take the course of a true statesman, one with a long-term vision for the nation and its role in the world. He should build a functional democracy in the UK, and let this nation chart a popular course into this new era of geopolitics.

That starts with electoral reform. The UK’s first-past-the-post system, designed for a different era, has allowed minority rule, entrenched safe seats, and fuelled public disillusionment. A more proportional system would not only better reflect the political will of the public but also make it harder for the right-wing populists to hijack the system with a minority of support, as has happened across the Atlantic.

British elections are still less dominated by money than those in the US, but that gap is narrowing. Dark money, corporate donations, and influence from foreign actors are seeping into the system. Without tighter regulations and transparency laws, the UK risks following America down the path of oligarchic influence, where political outcomes are increasingly shaped by wealth rather than public will.

And perhaps most urgently, there is the challenge of disinformation. The US has shown what happens when politically-charged lies are allowed to spread unchecked – public trust in institutions collapses, extremism flourishes, and democracy becomes vulnerable to manipulation.

From Russian interference in Brexit to AI-generated deepfakes in political campaigns, Britain must take proactive steps against the Silicon Valley oligarchs (the same ones surrounding Trump at his inauguration) and their increasingly dangerous digital platforms.

If Starmer truly wants Britain to be a champion of liberal democracy in a changing world, it’s not enough to play power politics with Trump or cling to a fading “special relationship.” Britain must lead by example, and weather this storm by building a resilient, fair and functional democracy.

He can start quite easily, with a National Commission for Electoral Reform to begin the process of turning Britain into a functional modern democracy, figuring out the best way forward while he carries on with his other duties. The idea was put forward by the All Party Parliamentary Group for Electoral Reform (one of the largest APPGs in Parliament), and Open Britain currently has a petition running to get it done – sign it if you haven’t already!