Mandelson files released at sensitive time for UK relations with Donald Trump

The release of the “Mandelson files” comes at a difficult moment in relations between the US and UK. It is unlikely to ease tensions.

The UK government has submitted to pressure from MPs to disclose files relating to the hiring and vetting of Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US. Questions have been raised about how much officials, including the prime minister, Keir Starmer, knew about Mandelson’s friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein after his conviction for sex offences in 2008.

The key takeaway from the release doesn’t relate to the US president, Donald Trump. This is that Mandelson tried to negotiate a severance package worth £547,201 after being asked to leave his post in Washington. He ended up getting £75,000. But there are details in the documents that will not be welcomed by the US, and the nature of the release will be of concern to a White House already under pressure for its own approach to Epstein.

Trump has already spent recent weeks publicly criticising Starmer for failing to support him on Iran, saying Starmer is no “Winston Churchill”. The release of these files may well lend further opportunity for Trump to hit out.

Lack of control

The questions about how much Starmer knew about Mandelson and Epstein arose in the first place after the US government partially released the Epstein files in January. These included email exchanges between Mandelson and Epstein revealing a relationship that extended long after the latter’s conviction. They have also led to a police investigation over communications made between the two men while Mandelson was a government minister. These allegedly relate to sensitive government information rather than anything relating sex offences.

Trump will not like the fact that this release has brought the Epstein files back into the spotlight – and particularly that it is happening in circumstances beyond his control.

Trump has repeatedly called for the Department of Justice to “move on” from this story, having faced questions about his own relationship with Epstein. He recently attacked CNN journalist Kaitlan Collins for not smiling as she asked him questions about the Epstein files, in a clear attempt to distract public attention.

There is a risk that the Mandelson document release will renew pressure on Trump to release the full cache of documents held by the US government – and that he will seek to divert attention by lashing out again at Starmer.

Unsurprisingly, given that many of these released documents were written for private consumption, they contain some comments that may be embarrassing for the authors and subjects.

In the documents, we can see the UK government reviewed public comments Mandelson made condemning Trump policies prior to his appointment as ambassador, apparently to consider whether they were a problem during the vetting process.

When speaking to students in Hong Kong, Mandelson said: “it’s also necessary to recognise Mr Trump’s behaviour for what it is: he is a bully and mercantilist who thinks that the US will gain in trade only when others are losing”. Trump will likely be annoyed by this attack on his treasured “tariffs” policy.

Crucially, given that Starmer appointed Mandelson despite these comments, these documents also show that the UK government did not object to Mandelson’s view.

London v Washington

The release from the UK will fuel a debate that has begun on the difference between how London and Washington have both responded to the the revelations in the Epstein files. The Trump administration continues to refuse to release its own files in full – and continues to be accused of covering up Trump’s relationship with Epstein.

The UK government has demonstrated that it is willing to fire people over their relationships with Epstein and that it won’t protect them from police investigation. Now it has shown willingness to release files showing how much the government knew about these relations. This is of course not the full release of files and Starmer insists several key items can’t be released because they are part of an ongoing police investigation, but it still leaves space for criticism of the US.

Trump and his administration will have been hoping that media attention would move on, focusing on the controversial airstrikes on Iran, or continuing ICE raids across US cities. It will not welcome inevitable comparisons between its unwillingness to act on revelations from the Epstein files – or to keep releasing more files – and the UK government’s decision to do both.

Crucially, US government officials will be watching for further document releases to see if this situation gets any worse.

Christopher Featherstone does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.