Starmer could hardly have hoped his trip to the White House would go this well

There are few obvious similarities between Sir Keir Starmer and Donald Trump. One is a cautious, even dry human rights lawyer from the left of politics; the other a swaggering right-winger who shoots from the hip.

But in their first face-to-face meeting since Trump returned to power, this odd couple seemed genuinely to be on the same wavelength.

Starmer can hardly have hoped that his trip to the White House would go this well. He dodged all of the major bear traps that could have doomed the visit to the annals of diplomatic disaster, and scored some notable wins.

Pulling out a letter from the King inviting the President for a state visit was a piece of stagecraft worthy of Trump himself, and got the meeting off to a promising start.

Predictions that Trump could veto the handover of the Chagos Islands, or criticise Starmer’s attempt to get closer to the EU, did not come true. It was a bit of a surprise that he had even heard of Chagos, but he was quick to insist that he is likely to back the deal.

When the President said that Starmer had been a “tough negotiator” on trade, it appeared that there could be a division emerging – but he ended up suggesting that a deal to avoid US tariffs on the UK could well be on the cards.

And on Ukraine, the mood music was much more positive than it has been previously; the President praised Volodymyr Zelensky and – in a significant departure – said he was keen to help Kyiv reclaim the land that it has lost to Russian aggression.

Starmer did not get everything that he wanted. In particular, Trump has not yet endorsed the UK’s plans for a “backstop” in which the US would provide security guarantees for Ukraine and for the European peacekeepers who would be stationed in the country after a future peace deal.

There is a long way to go in the Starmer-Trump relationship: the President’s term has 47 months still to run, and barring a major downturn in fortunes Starmer will still be in office for the whole of that period.

Things could still go badly wrong, as Theresa May discovered when her initially warm relationship with Trump in his first term ended in acrimony as the leaders squabbled over Brexit. We all know Trump is mercurial and a single temper-tantrum could derail his bromance with his unlikely new pal.

But for now, the outcome of this short visit looks like vindication for Starmer’s strategy of sticking close to the President, avoiding any public disagreements – the one time they clashed directly in their two extended public appearances at the White House was when the Prime Minister corrected Trump’s claim that European donors to Ukraine are getting their money back – and being a “bridge” between the US and Europe.

If Starmer can continue to nudge Trump’s policy positions closer to those of the UK, he will think that the moral trade-offs involved in backing a President whose beliefs and personal style are so different to his own have been worth it.

Some Labour MPs are distinctly uncomfortable with how Starmer is buddying up with Trump – they may look longingly towards London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, who in his more liberated position often lets rip at the President.

And if the relationship does start to go south, they will be quick to boast that the trade-offs were never a good idea in the first place. But right now, it seems to be so far so good for the Prime Minister whose greatest fear is that the “special relationship” and indeed the whole network of Western alliances could collapse on his watch.

Hugo Gye is political editor at The i Paper