In a striking display of transatlantic diplomacy, US President Donald Trump concluded his two-day state visit to the United Kingdom with a bold call for Britain to deploy its military to tackle the escalating small boats crisis in the English Channel. Speaking at a press conference held at Chequers, the official country residence of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Trump described unchecked migration as a force “destroying countries from within” and urged decisive action to curb the flow of migrants crossing from France. His remarks, delivered with characteristic bluntness, underscored the urgency of addressing what he described as a global challenge threatening national sovereignty and stability. The press conference, which capped a historic visit marked by both cooperation and candid disagreements, also saw the signing of a landmark £31 billion “Tech Prosperity Deal” aimed at bolstering UK-US collaboration in cutting-edge technologies.
Trump’s Call for Military Action on Migration
The small boats crisis, which has seen over 30,000 migrants cross the English Channel from France in 2025 alone, dominated discussions during Trump’s visit. Responding to a question from The Sun’s political editor about what advice he would offer Starmer, Trump did not mince words. “It doesn’t matter what measures you take, as long as you stop it,” he said, emphasizing the need for robust intervention. “We have to remove them, and we are removing them. We have no choice, and I feel very strongly about it.” His suggestion that Britain consider deploying its military to address the crisis raised eyebrows, marking a provocative escalation in rhetoric surrounding an issue that has long vexed UK policymakers.
Trump framed the Channel crossings as part of a broader global migration challenge, drawing parallels with the United States’ own struggles to manage its borders. “It’s a very hard chore,” he acknowledged, noting that migration pressures are straining governments worldwide. His comments come amid growing scrutiny of the UK’s immigration policies, particularly the “one-in one-out” scheme, which has been in place for over 40 days but has resulted in only one migrant being returned. The scheme, designed to deter crossings by ensuring swift returns, has faced criticism for its limited impact, with the vast majority of arrivals remaining in the UK while their asylum claims are processed.
The small boats crisis has become a lightning rod for political debate in Britain, with public frustration mounting over the government’s inability to stem the tide of arrivals. The English Channel, one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes, has seen a surge in dangerous crossings by migrants fleeing conflict, persecution, or economic hardship in countries such as Syria, Afghanistan, and Eritrea. Smuggling gangs, operating sophisticated networks, have capitalized on the desperation of migrants, charging thousands of pounds for perilous journeys in overcrowded, often unseaworthy vessels. The UK government has invested heavily in border security, including agreements with France to increase patrols and disrupt smuggling operations, but the numbers continue to climb.
Trump’s suggestion of military involvement, while not elaborated in detail, appeared to advocate for a more muscular approach, potentially involving naval patrols or other forms of direct intervention. Such a move would represent a significant departure from current UK policy, which relies primarily on Border Force vessels, aerial surveillance, and cooperation with European partners. Critics immediately raised concerns about the feasibility and ethics of militarizing the response to a humanitarian issue, warning that it could escalate tensions with France and alienate international allies. Others, however, saw Trump’s remarks as a reflection of the growing impatience among some Western leaders with migration policies perceived as ineffective.
A Broader Critique of Migration Policies
Trump’s comments on migration were not limited to the UK. He drew on his administration’s experience in the US, where border security has been a cornerstone of his political agenda. During his first term and into his current presidency, Trump has prioritized stringent immigration controls, including the construction of border walls and aggressive deportation programs. His reference to “removing them” echoed policies aimed at expediting the removal of undocumented migrants in the US, a strategy that has sparked both support and fierce opposition. By framing migration as a threat to national integrity, Trump sought to align his perspective with the challenges facing the UK, positioning himself as a partner in tackling a shared problem.
In the UK, the small boats crisis has fueled intense political debate, with Starmer’s Labour government under pressure to deliver on promises to “smash the gangs” behind the crossings. The government’s efforts to strengthen border security and negotiate returns agreements with European countries have yielded mixed results, with logistical and legal barriers complicating repatriation efforts. The European Union’s reluctance to accept large-scale returns, coupled with human rights concerns, has limited the effectiveness of schemes like “one-in one-out,” leaving the UK grappling for solutions.
Trump’s intervention added a new dimension to the debate, injecting a sense of urgency and polarizing rhetoric into an already contentious issue. While some UK commentators welcomed his call for decisive action, others criticized it as an oversimplification of a complex problem. Humanitarian organizations, in particular, expressed alarm at the idea of military involvement, arguing that it risks escalating a crisis that requires compassion and international cooperation rather than confrontation.
The Tech Prosperity Deal: A New Era of Cooperation
Beyond migration, the press conference highlighted a significant milestone in US-UK relations: the signing of the £31 billion “Tech Prosperity Deal.” Described by Starmer as a cornerstone of the “special relationship” between the two nations, the agreement aims to position the UK and US as global leaders in artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and nuclear energy. The deal includes substantial investments from major US technology companies, underscoring the economic ties binding the two countries.
Key components of the deal include:
Microsoft’s £22 billion investment in UK cloud and AI infrastructure, aimed at expanding data centers and supporting AI-driven innovation across industries.
Google’s £5 billion commitment to establish a new data center in the UK, enhancing the country’s digital infrastructure and supporting cloud-based services.
Nvidia’s contribution of 120,000 GPUs to power a sovereign AI project, designed to bolster the UK’s ability to develop and deploy advanced AI systems independently.
CoreWeave’s £1.5 billion expansion of AI capacity in Scotland, expected to create jobs and strengthen the UK’s position in the global AI race.
UK ministers hailed the agreement as a game-changer, predicting it would create thousands of jobs, accelerate medical research, and enhance Britain’s sovereignty over critical technology infrastructure. Starmer emphasized the broader economic impact, noting that the deal is part of a £250 billion transatlantic investment package—the largest of its kind in British history. “This is about securing our future,” Starmer said, estimating that the investments could generate up to 15,000 high-skilled jobs across the UK.
Trump, for his part, described the deal as a testament to the “priceless” and “unbreakable” bond between the US and UK. He praised the agreement for cementing the two nations’ leadership in technology and innovation, framing it as a strategic counter to the growing influence of rivals like China in the global tech race. “This is how we stay ahead,” Trump declared, gesturing to Starmer. “We’re building the future together.”
However, the deal was not without its critics. Some analysts warned that the heavy reliance on US tech giants could deepen the UK’s dependence on American firms, potentially compromising its technological sovereignty. Concerns were also raised about the concentration of critical infrastructure in the hands of a few corporate giants, with implications for data privacy and national security. Despite these reservations, the scale of the investment and its potential to drive economic growth were widely seen as a coup for Starmer’s government, which has prioritized technological advancement as a key pillar of its economic strategy.
Ukraine and Global Security
The press conference also touched on pressing global security issues, with Trump expressing frustration over Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. “I expected it to be among the easiest to resolve because of my relationship with Putin, but he has really let me down,” Trump said, signaling a shift in his tone toward the Russian president. His remarks suggested a personal disappointment, contrasting with his earlier claims of a strong rapport with Putin.
Starmer, standing alongside Trump, reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to supporting Ukraine and increasing pressure on Moscow. “The UK and US are united in our resolve to end the killing and bring peace,” he said, highlighting joint efforts to provide military and humanitarian aid to Kyiv. The war in Ukraine, now in its fourth year, remains a defining challenge for Western leaders, with no clear path to resolution. Trump’s comments hinted at the complexities of navigating personal diplomacy with Putin while maintaining a firm stance against Russian aggression.
The discussion of Ukraine underscored the broader alignment between the US and UK on matters of global security, even as differences in approach occasionally surfaced. Starmer’s emphasis on multilateral cooperation contrasted with Trump’s more unilateral instincts, but both leaders projected a united front in their commitment to countering Russian influence.
Energy and Palestine: Points of Contention
Trump’s remarks on energy policy further highlighted the divergences between the two leaders. Urging the UK to “drill baby, drill” in the North Sea, Trump advocated for an aggressive expansion of fossil fuel extraction, a stance at odds with Starmer’s focus on renewable energy and net-zero goals. The UK has scaled back North Sea drilling in recent years, prioritizing green energy initiatives, but Trump’s call resonated with some Conservative voices who argue that domestic oil and gas production is essential for energy security.
On the issue of recognizing Palestine, Trump was unequivocal in his disagreement with Starmer. The UK has faced growing pressure to formally recognize a Palestinian state, particularly in light of ongoing conflicts in the Middle East. Starmer has signaled an openness to recognition as part of a broader peace process, but Trump’s opposition reflects his administration’s staunch support for Israel and skepticism of Palestinian statehood. The exchange underscored the delicate balance of aligning US and UK foreign policy priorities in a region fraught with complexity.
A Historic Visit and the Road Ahead
Trump’s state visit, the first of his second term, was a carefully choreographed display of the US-UK “special relationship.” From ceremonial welcomes to high-stakes policy discussions, the visit underscored both the enduring partnership and the challenges of navigating differences in leadership style and priorities. Starmer, a centre-left prime minister, and Trump, a polarizing conservative, managed to project unity on key issues like technology and security while acknowledging areas of disagreement.
The £31 billion Tech Prosperity Deal emerged as the centerpiece of the visit, signaling a shared commitment to shaping the future of innovation. However, Trump’s provocative call for military action on the Channel migrant crisis stole headlines, sparking debate about the feasibility and implications of such a move. As the UK grapples with the small boats crisis and the broader challenges of migration, Trump’s intervention is likely to reverberate in political circles, adding pressure on Starmer to deliver results.
For Trump, the visit was an opportunity to reassert his influence on the global stage, positioning himself as a decisive leader willing to tackle tough issues head-on. His candid remarks on migration, Ukraine, and energy reflected his trademark style—unapologetic, confrontational, and focused on immediate action. For Starmer, the visit was a chance to showcase his government’s ambitions, from economic growth to technological leadership, while navigating the complexities of aligning with a US administration known for its unpredictability.
As Trump departed Chequers, the image of the two leaders standing side by side—smiling but not without tension—captured the essence of the US-UK relationship in 2025: a partnership rooted in history and shared interests, yet constantly tested by differing visions and global pressures. The Tech Prosperity Deal and the migration debate will likely define the legacy of this visit, shaping the trajectory of bilateral ties in the years to come.
