Trump Reaffirms US Commitment to UK, Praises British Military Strength.

During his meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Washington, US President Donald Trump reaffirmed the deep-rooted alliance between the United States and the United Kingdom, describing it as one of the longest and strongest relationships in history.

“And we also have two countries that have gotten along for the longest period of time. Number one ally on each side. We have France, Australia, a lot of good ones — but we’ve had a long-time relationship, a long time, hundreds of years,” Trump stated, highlighting the historical depth of the alliance.

Trump’s remarks come as both nations seek to reinforce defence and security cooperation, particularly in the context of ongoing global conflicts. The meeting between Trump and Starmer focused heavily on military ties, with both leaders expressing a commitment to standing together in times of crisis.

The US President praised the British military, acknowledging its long history of excellence in combat.

“I’ve always found about the British, they don’t need much help,” Trump said. “They can take care of themselves very well. The British have been incredible soldiers, incredible military, and they can take care of themselves, but if they need help, I’ll always be with the British.”

The comments underline the US’s continued commitment to supporting the UK while also recognising Britain’s own capabilities as a fmilitary power.

This aligns with Starmer’s own remarks, in which he reaffirmed Britain’s readiness to take a leading role in global security, including its willingness to deploy forces in support of a Ukraine peace deal.

Trump’s remarks echo a long-standing US stance on UK military capability, with previous administrations often emphasising Britain’s reliability as a strategic partner.

Lisa West
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.

47 COMMENTS

  1. Problem is that Trump says one thing one day and another thing the next. Whether this is intentional on his part or due to possible senility the bottom line is that he isn’t a president that any ally of the US can count on. Trump also knows nothing about history or geography. He’s a conman from Brooklyn, treat him as such.

    • That’s all true but atleast he said it, we have had two terrible democratic presidents who treated us very badly both Biden and Obama claiming some apparent historical crime we committed against their ancestors while completely forgetting we sent an entire division to Iraq for them and put a brigade in the mountains of Asia for over a decade because they were attacked.

      I wonder what Ireland is doing now, probably shitting themselves because under Biden they grew the largest trade imbalance with the USA in the world.

      • Ireland is fine. The Irish are number three in the world for owning US debt to the tune of $800 billion. China is number 1 and Japan is number 2.

        The Irish- American lobby is very powerful in the US and Ireland is a member of the EU which is a near peer economy to the US.

        Its Canada and the UK that need to tread lightly around the Trump government. Trump wants to fool around with the $1 trillion trade a year between the US and Canada. The border US states will find out real soon what tariffs will mean.

        • The US Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) are the voices of corporate America and they have both spoken out against the Trump tariffs. I really don’t think that these tariffs will last long. Trump is an idiot who doesn’t even understand how tariffs work and once organizations like the US Chamber of Commerce and the NAM ramp up their campaigns against a tariff war then Trump will be forced to back down.

    • Doesn’t matter. The UK needs to build a military which any country would think twice about messing with. In the short term we need to establish temporary alliances with reliable partners to deal with todays issues. Rapid and cost effective kit needs to be put in place and we need to put in place training for at least 50,000 military personell with immediate effect and keep the mechanisms for future tranches.

      • we need to establish temporary alliances with reliable partners

        Exactly what I mean. The US under Trump is not reliable. Reliable partners are stable partners and Trump is anything but stable. Short term, look after yourselves and don’t count on the States; long term, hope that Trump and Trumpism are gone and that the US engages on a multilateral basis again as they have since the end of the Second World War.

          • I don’t know if the GOP will ever go back. The Republican Party has been hijacked and taken over by MAGA it’s hard to see how that will reverse itself as over the next few years the MAGA is going to consolidate itself within the party like a cancer.
            There are plenty of decent republicans but how they get their party back I do not know. Perhaps the only thing that can kill MAGA is the utter failure of Trump’s programme and multiple obvious abuses of power, but so many of his supporters live in an echo chamber and he is such a pathological liar and his entire administration is willing to go along with it that frankly he will blame anyone and everyone else for any failures and his supporters will seemingly believe it.

            Trump’s utter failure would also seriously weaken the US, not a desirable state of affairs in this modern world.

            Perhaps the best we can hope for is that the cult of personality he has built is not transferable …. But I suspect it might be…

            In the meantime his spur of the moment decision making combined with a disinterest for detail, a thin skin, lack of empathy, his general narcissism and a need to feed raw meat to his base make him a highly risky person to rely on to come to our aid. But we have no choice in the short-term

  2. A bit of a joke Mr trump. The US stitched us up on Afghanistan. Tried to get a UN motion requiring we surrender the Falklands during the occupation. Stitched us up in Suez. Now messing with Ukraine causing uncertainty in europe. Outside ww2 when have they been there for the UK? Even ww2 they joined for their own economic interests, it wasn’t just joining to support it’s allies.

    I think it’s better to say our economic interests are often aligned and that benefits both of us.

    • The USA publicly maintained neutrality to try and not alienate countries in Latin America that it was trying to keep from communist influence. Behind the scenes, the USA supplied satellite and signals intelligence, critical fuel supplies at Ascension, plus stocks of both Sidewinder and Stinger missiles.

      WW2 they supplied aid under lend-lease when in 1941 Britain was effectively bankrupt and could not afford to pay for any more material. (The USA initially wanted payment up front as the U.K. default on its war debts to the USA after WW1.) While it took until 2006 to pay off the WW2 war debts, the U.K. was also the biggest recipient of Marshall Aid immediately after the war for rebuilding.

      So the relationship is more nuanced that just good/bad. Then are generally on our side, but want to ensure any damage to their self-interest is minimised.

      • The fuel on assention was provided on the QT by the base commander and didn’t involve the US government. The stingers were contractually ours, giving us access to stuff we had a right to have isn’t being helpful or not.

        Agreed it’s not black/white, but there is no special relationship, each nation is just doing what is in their own interests to do.

        • According Major General Julian Thompson the underground fuel tanks on Ascension were virtually empty when the task force arrived. The Americans specifically redirected a supertanker to Ascension to fill them.

          Lord Renwick went to the Pentagon and asked for the 105 Sidewinder missiles. Because we wanted the latest version (AIM-9L), and within 48 hours, they had to strip front-line USAF fighter squadrons to provide them. At the time we only had the AIM-9G.

          According to Sir Michael Rose, the Stingers used were ‘loaned’ to the SAS from Delta Force for ‘live testing’…

  3. Well to be fair it’s not hundreds of years..we sort of did not get along at all, the US hated our guts and even up to the late 1890s there were constantly calls for the US to do its best to exterminate the UK and it considered the Uk its core and enduring enemy.. it was only really a gradual change in views on the US at around the turn of the century..lead by 14 years of a Republican government and the defining US gold standard act that started to bring the two nations closer…and then over the next decade shifted into geopolitical neural friendship and closer interests…so really 100 years is closer to the truth not hundreds.

    • You’re right it’s no more than a 100 years of friendship. However, during this time they happily undermined our power and influence via lend-lease, taking over our military bases and undermining our moves in the Suez.

      I’m not arguing for a return of the Empire by the way (I hope we never become revanchist like the Russians, Neo-Ottomans and Hungarians), I am merely pointing out that with friends like the Americans, who needs enemies?!

  4. Except when he doesn’t feel like it or if we say anything he doesn’t like. Mercurial super brat. I hope our NHS is never opened up to savage exploitation by US “health” companies as a condition of trade deals. We must resist the Orange reich.

      • Yep, since 1373 or 1386 depending on your take (nb. it was with England, not the UK but still).

        I have been recently reading about Portugal’s amazing feats of navigation and exploration during the 14th and 15th centuries – the amount of bravery and skill they showed was immense.

      • Indeed it is formally since the reign of Richard the second..and it’s been meaningful as well..200 years later we did not pillage their treasure ships and they did not join Spain in trying to destroy us, we helped Portugal fight and finally win against napoleon, Portugals immediate offer of support during the Falklands war..there have been issues but it’s been a very long positive relationship.

        • Where were they in world war 2 when the fate of the world hung by a thread and we were facing starvation with convoys off the Portuguese coast being devastated.

          • They actually did a fair bit and their neutral stance was supported by the British government..because everyone knew that the moment they lost their neutrality there would be either a German or Spanish ( German backed) invasion and conquest. But even then it was an unequal forced neutrality not a true neutrality..Portugal provided support..it took in 2500 refugees from Gibraltar, it provided allied convoys with metrological data and reconnaissance from 1941 and in 1943 leased use of an airbase on the Azores to the allies, supporting strikes on U boats…

          • Wasn’t Portugal (the British Embassy in Lisbon) the main route out of Europe for airmen shot down over France?

          • Yes they played the old Neural not Neural game hard..they had to be carful because the bigger more powerful Spain was Neutral not neural in the other direction.

          • “…Neural not Neural ..”? Intended pun, given your previous association w/ NHS? 🤔😉😁👍

          • They also turned a rather blind eye to the actions of the Calcutta Light Horse in Goa during WW2, or at least took the British explanation that the entire incident was down to German sailors getting drunk and accidentally sinking all their merchant ships during the night.

        • I wish Spain would appreciate us more. We had an alliance with Castille against the Moors at the time of the Black Prince. We next showed up against Napoleon which was highly significant or they might all be speaking French.
          When they were weak we had a strong Navy and base you know where, that effectively defended them.

  5. Personally i think the UK needs to take advantage of this tumultuous time just as much as Trump is. We are in favour and the EU aren’t. We have the defence framework and leadership that the EU need. And we also have the US president’s ear (although an unpredictable one at that). We need to extract as many concessions from the EU as possible (favourable terms for Brits living in the EU, access to the single market, etc.) in exchange for taking a lead in the Ukraine, and thus European, security mission. If the French take the lead then there will definately be no support from the US.

    • The U.K. should lead the organising of European militaries as a force than can operate independently of NATO should the USA not honour its commitments. The U.K. has already shown an ability in this regard through JEF. If the U.K. does not, you can be sure Macron will suggest something similar, BUT lead by the EU…

      • I agree, the UK can capitalise on this as the honest broker to both sides. I think few in Europe would complain. Trump will 100% be pulling out all soldiers from Europe. They can keep the US in the political structure of NATO while removing it from command like France in the 60’s.

        Best all round solution.

        • Trump certainly wants to drastically reduce the US defence budget – it’s not just the USAID, NOAA, FAA, etc that’s going to be gutted. So Europe needs to be able to operate NATO without practical support even if USA political support is still there (eg post-Trump).
          How this is achieved will be interesting to see. Not seen to be splitting with the USA, but shown to be capable on its own.

          I suspect we may hear something after this weekends gathering of European leaders in London…

      • No one will follow the French. It’s just that simple. NATO communicates with each other in English, it was the British that are looked too as NATO’S 2ND power. Not France.
        We need to capitalise on this by leading Europe through hard power. After last night’s disgraceful behaviour in the Oval office the UK must move with immediate speed to 3% GDP to defence ratio by no later than 2028.
        Front loading with core orders and refurbishment of ships, vehicles, armoured vehicles, helicopters, aircraft now.

  6. Trump seems to have a love-hate relationship (or, in some cases, hate-hate) with most people. It’s as if he was at least two different people…

  7. We should thank the President for his very courteous welcome yesterday and maintain the most cordial.and constructive ties with the USA.

    And promptly pivot to a European security posture, as it seems clear that Trump’s administration has little interest in NATO and cannot anymore be relied upon to play its part in any conflict with Russia.

    We should henceforth look.to prioritise joint UK/European high-end procurement and scale back reliance on US.suppliers.

    It means Europe will really have to stretch to put sufficient boots on the ground and air power in Ukraine if required following a ceasefire deal.

    • Indeed, it needs to be a friends with a but relationship the buts are:

      1) an understanding that the US is not coming to Europes rescue and we need to have a very tight European lead defence union that focus on the Euro Atlantic, artic, Africa and Indian Oceans. With very good regional capabilities, but with the ability to do significant operations in Africa ( land, sea, air) as well as land and sea opps in the western Indian Ocean and carrier battle groups and SSN projection out to the eastern Indian Ocean to Australia ( basically protecting our Indian, south East Asian Sea lane accesses and access into the pacific.
      2) A pacific last policy, with A an at best a” friendly neutrality with Japan and the the western pacific democracies..based on trade and mutual respect and open exchange” and at worst guarded neutrality with china, that involves maximising trade benefits but not sharing advantage and tec. Essentially a no kinetic millitary engagement in the pacific..unless it’s a UN mandate.

      Then the UK needs an expeditionary “own interest”capability ( that is essentially our part of supporting the European expeditionary capability, but is still separate enough that we can and do use it for our own interests as well). This would probably be focused on the south Atlantic if and when needed and when it all goes BOOM GAME ON the Antarctic. We have to accept that at some point in the future the south Atlantic and Antarctic will turn into the Wild West and we own all the best bits..but everyone including the US will challenge this when the shit does it the snow.

  8. We do need to have a complete reset of expectations with the US even if it’s all nice mood music.

    1) we need to lead a new European push to security independence, that does not just mean just in the Euro Atlantic region, it means good expeditionary capability in the regions that directly impact Europe, its security and access to markets and resources..so the western Indian Ocean region, eastern Indian Ocean region, Africa and if we can get consensus the south Atlantic and Antarctic ( although we may need to just protect our own interest there as we have such a natural advantage over every other world power in that region)

    2) A new Pacific policy, friendly Neutrality with the western Pacific democracies ( trade and share developments and do security development) then guarded neutrality with china…lots of trade ( that benefits us but does not impact on industrial capacity) and no sharing of knowledge or capability ( apart from snooker). But this needs to be a no kinetic involvment stance..I would even go so far as to suggest the CBG curtails its pacific involvement to visits to Australia and a pop up to japan ( only because we promised )..but this should probably the last CBG that goes into the western pacific and it should avoid the china seas like the plague.

  9. We all want Starmer and Trump to get along. But Trump has damaged European confidence in the US. We have to maintain good relations while simultaneously boosting our own military self-sufficiency and industrial capacity and capability – to manufacture ammunition and build military equipment – where possible. On a side note… nearly everything from the Ukraine war shows that you need not just quality but also quantity, because just about all military equipment is semi-attributable.

  10. I wouldn’t trust the Orange Messiah. I’d much prefer we ramped up our defence forces and undertook a crash rearmament programme.

  11. Trump is utterly erratic. His actions over the past few weeks demonstrate quite clearly that the UK cannot rely on the so called. special relationship. We have to think the unthinkable, that the US will not always be in our corner.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here