Trump UK visit: Optics were good for Trump, but talks were thin on substance

Analysis: Any ‘phenomenal’ trade deal is dependent on Brexit negotiations, and subsequent fallout

Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK is deemed by American officials to have gone far better than many had feared. So much so that one official pointed out there was more concern now about what the president may tweet next about tariffs on Mexico – with a confrontation looming with congress on the issue – than what he had done here.

Even the weather had remained clement for the D-Day commemoration so there was no risk of the embarrassment of last November when Mr Trump travelled to France, but failed to turn up for a ceremony to honour the American fallen in the First World War because it was raining.

Mr Trump’s claim that thousands had been on the streets of Britain cheering him with just a handful protesting against the visit, when the exact reverse was true, was not, it was felt, a major issue. This was a president, after all, who had hugely inflated crowd numbers on his inauguration day, and is prone to other wild exaggerations, without adversely affecting the view of his supporters and ceasing to be a matter of surprise for the wider American public.

The scenes of the protests were shown on American networks, but the negative impact of that is believed to have been outweighed by the widespread coverage of Mr Trump and his relatives with the Queen and her family, with so many Americans fascinated by the royals.

Nothing concrete was achieved in the visit. But then there was no expectation of much else, with Theresa May due to go just days after the president departs and cabinet ministers unlikely to stay in their departments in the future with a new prime minister coming in and, possibly, an election in the offing.

Nothing much can be read into Mr Trump’s statements on matters such as intelligence sharing if the Chinese technology multinational, Huawei, is let into the UK telecommunications network or whether the NHS is on the table in a future trade deal. The US president contradicted himself in what he said on both these issues in a short space of time and his position may well change yet again.

The US is expected to continue applying pressure over Huawei. Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, has been on tour of European countries, lobbying for the Chinese company to be kept out of their networks, and it is highly unlikely, say officials, that the UK would be given a free pass on this by Washington.

The European states did not acquiesce immediately to American demands. But they have already expressed more reservations about Huawei than Britain and are likely to bring in some form of restrictions.

The UK’s need for a post-Brexit trade deal with the US will make it more susceptible, it is suggested, to what the Trump administration wants. And a quick deal, both governments agreed in London, was a welcome common objective.

Indeed, Mr Trump has promised a “phenomenal deal”. But just how likely is that? Most trade deals take years of negotiations and the extent of one with the US will depend on the terms finally agreed with the European Union on Brexit, something which continues to remain unclear.

The EU is Britain’s largest economic partner, accounting for 49.4 per cent of its trade. The US comes second, but with a significant drop to 14.7 per cent of total trade in goods and services.

Leaving the EU without a deal would allow the UK to negotiate its own trade deals without constraints. But there is little doubt that the big economies, not just the US, but others like China and India, would come with tough negotiating terms – what with the UK desperate for business.

There has been no evidence that Mr Trump’s “America First” policy would be waived for Britain, and Washington is likely to seek concessions on matters such as the EU’s safety and environmental standards.

This would create major problems between Britain and its largest trading partner and also make a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland a real possibility, endangering the Good Friday Agreement, which brought to an end 30 years of conflict.

This would have huge repercussions in US congress where approval would be needed on a trade deal. Nancy Pelosi, the senior Democrat in the House of Representatives, had stated there could be no trade deal with the UK if the Good Friday Agreement is threatened.

Others had taken a similar stance. Chris Murphy, a Democrat member of the Senate committees on foreign affairs and on oversight and government reform, held that congress is not going to pass a trade deal in the event of a hard Brexit, which would inevitably “blow up” the Northern Ireland peace process.

Just time-wise, he pointed out, an agreement is almost certain to come after the next US election when Mr Trump may not be in power and a Democrat president may be in the White House, maintained Mr Murphy. He and others have been advising all the contenders for the Democrat nomination for the 2020 presidential election of the need to put an EU deal first, if they win.

Mr Murphy also pointed out the determination of the Irish American lobby to preserve the Good Friday Agreement. “The lobby, of which I am a member, is pretty powerful in the US. Unless there is certainty about how you’re going to put off a hard border,” he wanted to stress, “there isn’t going to be a lot of interest in congress in the US getting into a trade deal with Britain.

“The head of the Committee on Overseas Trade in the House is Richie Neill, who is the most prominent member of the Irish American caucus, and he [will] be asking lots of questions, you can be sure, about the peace process before anything happens.”

Mr Trump flew out of Britain on Wednesday afternoon for Ireland where he will meet Leo Varadkar. The president will once again raise the topic of Huawei, according to Irish and American officials, and Brexit is due to be discussed with the taoiseach pointing out that his country and the EU will remain united on the issue of the hard border.

The “phenomenal” trade deal with Britain that Mr Trump has promised, a promise hard Brexiters have avidly embraced, will be neither quick nor easy, based as it is more on rhetoric rather than reality.