Foreign policy rarely dominates election campaigns, but often goes on to define the tenure of prime ministers. Consuelo Thiers analyses Keir Starmer’s personality traits and argues that he is likely to have a very different approach to foreign policy from previous UK prime ministers.
Keir Starmer got elected on a platform that focussed primarily on domestic policy, but days into his premiership he was thrown into the world of foreign affairs and defence with NATO’s 75th anniversary summit in Washington. And while Starmer has made some pledges about defence spending and continuing to support Ukraine in its war against Russia, the public have little sense of his thinking and outlook on the rest of the world. In fact, the public still have little sense of who Starmer himself is.
By analysing Starmer’s personality through his public statements and comparing them to former UK Prime Ministers, we can get a sense of his decision-making style when it comes to foreign policy.
Despite his attempt throughout the campaign, to present his background, values, and personality to the public, a Public First poll suggested these efforts did not fully reach the electorate. This unfamiliarity with Starmer himself, as well as his foreign policy thinking brings a high level of uncertainty about how he will govern when it comes to foreign affairs. But there is a round-about way of making an educated guess. Research has shown that the personality traits of political leaders help us understand and predict their foreign policy decisions. By analysing Starmer’s personality through his public statements and comparing them to former UK Prime Ministers, we can get a sense of his decision-making style when it comes to foreign policy.
In the current tumultuous international climate, the role of major political figures leading key players like the UK is crucial for both the future of their respective nations and global security and stability. Research in Foreign Policy Analysis shows that states do not always respond rationally to world events and that understanding foreign policy behaviour requires focusing on decision-makers’ psychology. Starmer will face significant challenges, including the war in the Middle East, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the potential re-election of Donald Trump in the US, and the rise of the far right in Europe. So, what can we expect from Starmer’s government on the international stage?
The Leadership Trait Analysis (LTA) framework proposed by Margaret Hermann allows researchers to assess leaders’ personalities and their impact on foreign policy based on their public statements. The logic behind it is that the way key political figures speak in public addresses, including their choice of words and phrases, is a good reflection of their character.
I used this framework to assess Keir Starmer’s personality traits to help shed light on his potential approach to foreign policy decision-making. Assisted by a computer programme, I analysed 39,107 words from fourteen interviews given by Starmer between 22 May and 2 July 2024, focusing on press interviews and his responses to public questions during campaign events and debates. By using spontaneous material instead of prepared speeches, I aimed to obtain a more accurate account of his personality and avoid the influence of speechwriters.
These characteristics suggest that Starmer will challenge constraints internationally, exerting both direct and indirect influence to bring about the changes he deems necessary.
This Leadership Trait Analysis provides scores for seven personality traits crucial for decision-making in foreign policy. Starmer’s scores were compared with a sample of twenty-three UK party leaders, revealing that his profile is significantly different from most decision-makers. Six of the seven traits measured are either substantially higher or lower than average. Starmer’s beliefs in his ability to control external events and his need for power are particularly high. Leaders with these traits are proactive and confident in shaping outcomes, with a strong desire to influence the environment to achieve their political goals. These characteristics suggest that Starmer will challenge constraints internationally, exerting both direct and indirect influence to bring about the changes he deems necessary.
Starmer also displays a high level of conceptual complexity compared to other UK party leaders. This suggests he is flexible and capable of seeing nuances in the international environment. Consequently, Starmer is likely to gather a wide range of information and consider different points of view before making a decision. While this approach can lead to more balanced decisions, it may also potentially delay the decision-making process.
Starmer exhibits very high distrust towards the world, reflecting a general doubt and uneasiness about others, especially those perceived as competitors.
In terms of what motivates leaders to seek office, Starmer shows a high relationship orientation and a low task orientation compared to other UK leaders. Leaders with similar traits focus more on maintaining group morale and building relationships than on completing tasks. It is expected that he will be highly attuned to what people want and need. Additionally, he displays a low in-group bias, which correlates with a less confrontational approach and a greater capacity to perceive and engage in win-win agreements.
On the other hand, Starmer exhibits very high distrust towards the world, reflecting a general doubt and uneasiness about others, especially those perceived as competitors. Leaders high in distrust highly value loyalty, tend to be hypersensitive to criticism, and may become confrontational.
Now, how does Starmer’s profile compare to two key figures in the Conservative Party? Can we expect drastic changes? Previous works using the same framework show that Starmer shares some relevant characteristics with both Sunak and Johnson but also diverges in some important areas. Starmer, Sunak, and Johnson all have a very high belief in their ability to control events and a strong need for power, which makes these leaders defiant of constraints on the international stage. Additionally, these three leaders share a high focus on relationships and a low focus on tasks. Starmer and Sunak both exhibit a high degree of distrust towards others, unlike Johnson, who scores average in this trait compared to other UK leaders.
These characteristics indicate that Starmer is likely to influence international policy significantly, focusing on negotiation and balance, but with a tendency to be wary and potentially confrontational towards perceived adversaries.
A major difference among the three leaders is Starmer’s very high conceptual complexity, compared to the very low levels shown by Johnson and Sunak. This suggests that Starmer is more capable of balancing different opinions and avoiding black-and-white perceptions of international matters. Furthermore, Starmer shows the lowest in-group bias of the three, which could lead to a better capacity for negotiation and reaching agreements.
In summary, Starmer’s personality is characterised by a high belief in his ability to control events, a strong need for power, and a complex approach to decision-making. While he shares some traits with previous Conservative Prime Ministers, his unique profile suggests a leader who is both proactive and nuanced. These characteristics indicate that Starmer is likely to influence international policy significantly, focusing on negotiation and balance, but with a tendency to be wary and potentially confrontational towards perceived adversaries.
All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of LSE British Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Image credit: Michael Tubi on Shutterstock
