The ‘Special Relationship’: Transatlantic Ties and the Impact of the 2024 Presidential Election

By Kate Mellor, Second Year History 

Official portraits of: Harry S. Truman, Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Tony Blair, Donald Trump, Keir Starmer, Kamala Harris (left to right, top to bottom).

On 5 March 1946, Winston Churchill made a speech in Fulton, Missouri, in which he announced that to ensure peace and prosperity in the post-war world, a ‘Special Relationship’ between the US and UK must be formed. Control of nuclear weapons, promotion of democracy and enshrined human rights were at the forefront of the relationship’s priorities. Seventy-eight years later and this term is still a feature of modern transatlantic political jargon.

This is not to say that the relationship began in 1946. The two allies had worked closely during the Second World War, signing the Quebec Agreement in 1943 and committing to a combined effort to develop nuclear weapons. The beginning of this relationship could even be marked in 1607, when Jamestown was established in the Colony of Virginia. Indeed, President Bush stated in 2007 that the relationship was founded in common ‘values’, ‘traditions’, and ‘shared history’. Colonial connections have certainly cultivated this relationship.

Shared language, common enemies, democracy and trade have underpinned this relationship over the past century. And alliance between leaders has helped to maintain it. When discussing her relationship with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher once referred to the former President as the second most important man in her life after her husband. However, personal relationships are not essential to the ‘Special Relationship’. The phrase is symbolic, intangible and enduring. Nevertheless, personal affinity has supported the relationship and led to pivotal moments of alliance between the US and the UK.

One crucial example of this is the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. The US started putting plans in place to invade Iraq following the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. Tony Blair and George W. Bush already shared a close relationship, but following the 9/11 attacks Bush remarked that the UK was America’s closest ally. Of the three countries that joined the US in its invasion, the UK provided the most troops at 45,000. The decision was based on misinformation about Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction and led to the loss of approximately 200,000 civilian lives. A seminal moment in the history of this relationship, the Iraq War is a vivid example of the connectivity between the US and the UK, and the result of close relations between the President and Prime Minister. 

Some political commentators would argue that the ‘Special Relationship’ has declined in relevance in recent years. However, Keir Starmer referred to the term recently when discussing dinner with Donald Trump. So how will the 2024 presidential election influence the ‘Special Relationship’?

Considering one of the founding principles of the relationship was to ensure the promotion of democracy, a presidential candidate who denied the results of a democratic election surely undermines this relationship. Indeed, Donald Trump’s political ambitions more closely resemble the infringements on human rights the ‘Special Relationship’ was set up to protect against. As Dr Andrew Gawthorpe suggests, a Trump victory would signal that the United States and United Kingdom are not united on a commitment to ‘freedom and international order’.

On the other hand, it is hard not to draw similarities between Keir Starmer and Kamala Harris, both having held prominent roles as criminal prosecutors before turning to politics. And there is little ambiguity about which candidate Labour are supporting in this presidential election. Headlines over the past week have featured the news that Labour has sent over a hundred past and present staff members to campaign for Harris in swing states - outraging Republicans. 

Harris and Trump lack consensus on almost every issue. Their policies are so radically juxtaposed that the result of this election will bear large consequences, not just for the US but for its foreign relations. Trump’s agendas contradict the UK’s in almost every sense, from desires to restrict women’s reproductive rights, to imposing a 10% tariff on the majority of imports. A Trump victory would assuredly strain the ‘Special Relationship’, whereas a Harris victory is likely to ease it.  

The future of the ‘Special Relationship’ hangs in the balance. Although the relationship is flexible, it is threatened by Trump’s radical right-wing politics, perhaps in a way that has yet to be seen. On 5 November, two polarising candidates will become one successor, and we will gain a better insight into the next four years of Anglo-American relations.