Body language expert says PM’s angry response shows shift from his previous ‘desire to please and flatter’ Trump
Keir Starmer’s vehement reaction to Donald Trump’s remarks about NATO troops in Afghanistan could mark his first instance of confronting Trump, suggests an expert.
The Prime Minister labelled Trump’s assertion that NATO allies “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines” as “insulting and frankly appalling”, during a press briefing at 10 Downing Street. This fiery response showcased a side of Starmer that deviated from his previous disposition of seeking to “active desire to please and flatter” Trump, leading body language specialist Judi James to speculate that this “could be his first moment of standing up to Trump to challenge or show public disapproval”.
However, Judi informed the Mirror that “it does come down on a path that other leaders have trail-blazed this week”. She cited French President Emmanuel Macron and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney as examples of leaders who have “tested the water for Starmer”.
Upon analysing the Prime Minister’s remarks, Judi commented: “This could be his first moment of standing up to Trump to challenge or show public disapproval, but it does come down a path that other leaders have trail-blazed this week, like Macron, Carney and Meloni. They have tested the waters for Starmer and appeared to have been successful as a result.”
She continued: “This statement by Starmer does sound more specific and even personal though and there are strong wrods like ‘insulting’ and ‘appalling’ that should leap off the page for Trump, unlike the use of the more emotive ‘such hurt’ which could suggest he’s seeking an apology to restore order.”, reports the Mirror.
This represents a departure from the same Starmer who was previously spotted sharing laughs and banter with the President during his UK visit last year, when the Prime Minister seemed eager to strengthen the ‘special relationship’ between both nations.
Reflecting on their previous encounters, Judi observed: “Starmer’s meetings with Trump to date have shown Starmer in a more conciliatory mode with an active desire to please and flatter to buff up the ‘special relationship’ . He has shown a desire to define a friendship and enjoys applying his signature arm and shoulder pats to register that.”
Analysing Starmer’s body language during his comments, Judi remarked: “Starmer clearly wants to present a verbal and non-verbal tone of anger and indignation here and his ‘prepping’ gestures as he listens to his question suggest this is a well-planned and well choreographed performance to hit the right note in the UK. His hard, staccato blinking as he waits to start look almost like morse code messages of irritation. Exaggerated, rapid blinking like this can be a sign of aggressive arousal and the adrenalin burst that comes when the fight/flight mode has been triggered.
“His chest’s shallow heaving changes subtly to a faster and quicker rise as he waits to start and this also suggests an air of keenness and expectation as though he can barely wait to get stuck in. His rapid nods cut through the questions in a form of non-verbal interruption, suggesting impatience to say his piece and when that time comes he literally springs into life, taking control of the message by beginning with the words ‘Let me…’ as an announcement to his speech and throwing his hands up in the air in front of his torso in an ‘invisible brick’ gesture to add drama while suggesting a desire to take control of the problem.
“His voice comes as a shout to, again, suggest anger and indignation. By acting out his anger, indignation and a rather school head-style, more authoritarian approach when he clasps his hands in his fall-back pose, he seems to be role-playing the emotions that actually should be aimed at Trump himself rather than the interviewer he is talking to. This style of second-hand emotional mime suggests a desire to show the public how he will be when he speaks to Trump or to ensure he is seen as taking a strong stance on the public’s behalf.
“His head batons and his hand chopping gestures suggest a state of aggressive arousal and he very emphatically uses the word ‘I’ very heavily to suggest the ‘fight’ is a personal one. His ‘I consider Trump’s remarks to be insulting and frankly appauling’ are perhaps the strongest terms he could have used and mildly out of character. He delivers them with a sustained stare that suggests he is, again, role-playing a one-to-one with the President and he uses a dramatic pause as though allowing his words to sink in.”