Sir Keir Starmer was at home in Downing Street, watching Arsenal lose in the Champions League, when he got a call from Donald Trump that he thought presented the chance to snatch victory from the jaws of trading defeat.

The president’s call was a characteristic last-minute flex intended to squeeze a little more out of the prime minister.

It was enough to persuade Sir Keir and his business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, dining with industry bosses across London at Mansion House, that they had to seize the opportunity.

Money blog: What interest rate cut means for your money
Key details of ‘historic’ trade deal
PM must show public how trade deal benefits them

The result, hurriedly announced via presidential conference call, is not the broad trade deal of Brexiteer dreams, and is certainly not a free-trade agreement.

It’s a narrow agreement that secures immediate relief for a handful of sectors most threatened by Mr Trump’s swingeing tariffs, with a promise of a broader renegotiation of “reciprocal” 10% tariffs to come.

Most pressing was the car industry, which Mr Reynolds said was facing imminent announcements of “very difficult news” at Britain’s biggest brands, including Jaguar Land Rover, which sounds like code for redundancies.

In place of the 25% tariffs imposed last month, a 10% tariff will apply to a quota of 100,000 vehicles a year, less than the 111,000 exported to the US in 2024, but close enough for a deal.

It still leaves the car sector far worse off than it was before “liberation day”, but, with one in four exports crossing the Atlantic, ministers reason it’s better than no deal, and crucially offers more favourable terms than any major US trading partner can claim.

For steel and aluminium zero tariffs were secured, along with what sounds like a commitment to work with the US to prevent Chinese dumping. That is a clear win and fundamental for the ailing industries in Britain, though modest in broad terms, with US exports worth only around £400m a year.

In exchange, the UK has had to open up access to food and agricultural products, starting with beef and ethanol, used for fuel and food production.

In place of tariff quotas on beef that applied on either side (12% in the UK and 20% in America) 13,000 tonnes of beef can flow tariff-free in either direction, around 1.5% of the UK market.

The biggest wins

Crucially, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) production standards that apply to food and animal products, and prevent the sale of hormone-treated meat, will remain. Mr Trump even suggested the US was moving towards “no chemical” European standards.

This may be among the biggest wins, as it leaves open the prospect of an easing of SPS checks on trade with the European Union, a valuable reduction in red tape that is the UK’s priority in reset negotiations with Brussels.

Farmers also believe the US offers an opportunity for their high-quality, grass-fed beef, though there is concern that the near-doubling of ethanol quotas is a threat to domestic production.

Technology deals to come?

There were broad commitments to do deals on technology, AI and an “economic security blanket”, and much hope rests on the US’s promise of “preferential terms” when it comes to pharmaceuticals and other sectors.

There was no mention of proposed film tariffs, still unclear even in the Oval Office.

Taken together, officials describe these moves as “banking sectoral wins” while they continue to try and negotiate down the remaining tariffs.

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The challenge from here is that Mr Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff is not reciprocal at all. As commerce secretary Howard Lutnick proudly pointed out in the Oval Office, tariffs on US trade have fallen to less than 2%, while the UK’s have risen to 10%.

As a consequence, UK exporters remain in a materially worse position than they were at the start of April, though better than it was before the president’s call, and for now, several British industries have secured concessions that no other country can claim.

From a protectionist, capricious president, this might well be the best deal on offer.

Quite what incentive Mr Trump will have to renegotiate the blanket tariff, and what the UK has left to give up by way of compromise, remains to be seen. Sir Keir will hope that, unlike the vanquished Arsenal, he can turn it round in the second leg.

Donald Trump has a soft spot for military spectacles and autocrats.

He will be looking on with envy as Vladimir Putin parades both in Moscow today, with Chinese leader Xi Jinping flying in to join Victory Day events in Red Square.

European allies of Ukraine will be watching nervously, wary of anything that could upturn the delicate quest for peace.

President Trump‘s patience with peddling his much vaunted “peace deal” has been wearing thin and allies had feared Ukraine could be punished for it.

That would have been grotesquely unfair, of course. Ukraine has bent over backwards to accommodate Mr Trump’s one-sided diplomacy that has so far seemed to favour the aggressor in this obscene war.

True, the Trump proposal does not agree to Russian annexation of all the land already taken by force and stops short of ordering the complete demilitarisation of Ukraine, but otherwise the proposals are pretty much everything that Moscow has asked for.

The deal is being pushed by Steve Witkoff, Mr Trump’s golf partner turned chief negotiator, a man regarded by diplomats as out of his depth and lost in the rough when it comes to the arts of statecraft.

Like his president, Mr Witkoff has a history of doing business with Russian oligarchs, an apparently starry-eyed view of the Russian leader and has called Ukraine a “false country”.

Moment of truth approaching

Mr Witkoff and Mr Trump have so far given Mr Putin the benefit of the doubt, but a moment of truth is approaching. While Ukraine has agreed to a longer ceasefire in principle, Mr Putin will not.

Ukraine’s European allies feared that Mr Trump was about to despair of progress, blame Ukraine and take US military support with him.

Then came the minerals agreement between the US and Ukraine. The breakthrough gave the US president something to show for his efforts and assuaged his desire for some kind of deal. He seems to have moved on for now, at least, and approved the first $50m of arms sales to Ukraine.

But these remain a tense few days ahead with plenty at stake.

Mr Putin’s self-declared three-day ceasefire raises the spectre paradoxically of escalation if either side breaks it.

The Russian lull is seen here in Kyiv as little more than a ploy.

If the Russian leader was serious about giving peace a chance, they say, he would have signed up to the permanent ceasefire being proposed by the Trump team.

Besides, Russia broke the last truce in Easter as soon as it had begun and used it to carry out surveillance and reinforcement operations says Kyiv. Why risk another pointless pause that is exploited by the invaders?

Escalation possible

If Russia plays the same games this time and Ukraine retaliates, there could be a significant escalation. Likewise, with any Ukrainian drone attack on Moscow during Victory Day.

Any major flare-up will not be looked on favourably by the US president if it upstages his first trip abroad this presidency, a three-day tour of the Middle East.

For now, his attention is not so much on the Ukraine conflict and he is no longer issuing threats to walk away and stop supporting the Ukrainians.

Read more from Sky News:
Ukraine and Russia accuse each other of breaching ceasefire
Putin prepares to host dozens of world leaders for Victory Day parade

That will be a relief here in the Ukrainian capital. They would be unwise to do anything to reengage him, for now at least.

Their European allies, though, know American involvement in this war appears to be receding.

Can they fill the vacuum?

This week, they remember the sacrifices made to bring peace and security to their continent 80 years ago.

Can they find the political will and unity to do so again, even without America?

Astonishingly, given all we have been through, that is still an open question.

India will respond to any escalation from Pakistan “proportionally and in exactly the same light”, the country’s high commissioner has told Sky News.

Weeks after 26 tourists were shot dead by gunmen in Indian-controlled Kashmir last month, India carried out missile strikes in Pakistan and Islamabad-administered parts of the disputed region.

On Wednesday, India said it hit nine “terrorist infrastructure” sites, while Pakistan said it was not involved in the April attack and the sites were not militant bases.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has since vowed that India will “now have to pay the price” for their “blatant mistake,” and skirmishes have also been reported along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

👉Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim on your podcast app👈

Speaking to Sky’s The World with Yalda Hakim on Thursday, India’s high commissioner to the UK, Vikram Doraiswami, said “the original escalation is Pakistan’s sponsored terror groups’ attack on civilians”.

India strikes ‘reasonable,’ says high commissioner

He then insisted India’s strikes in Pakistan and Kashmir were “precise, targeted, reasonable and moderate,” adding: “It was focused principally and solely on terrorist infrastructure.

“We made it abundantly clear that the object of this exercise was clearly to avoid military escalation.

“A fact that was actually acknowledged – in a left-handed way of course – by the Pakistani side in terms of their own statements, which said the airspace hadn’t been violated.”

Pakistan chose ‘to escalate the matter’

The high commissioner also said about claims Pakistan shot down Indian aircraft with Chinese-made fighter jets: “If it satisfies Pakistan’s ego to say that they’ve done something, they could have used that as an off-ramp to move on.

“Clearly they’ve chosen not to, and they’ve chosen to escalate the matter.”

And when asked about Pakistan’s threats of retaliation, Mr Doraiswami said: “We’re not looking for an escalation, but if Pakistan responds, as we have done, we will respond proportionally and in exactly the same light.”

He then referenced the border skirmishes, saying: “I do want to remind everybody: For the last 15 days, they’ve also opened artillery fire along the Line of Actual Control… That’s led to civilian casualties.”

Read more:
The story of India and Pakistan’s deadly conflict
How India and Pakistan’s militaries match up

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

It comes after India said Pakistan attacked its military stations in the Kashmir region with drones and missiles on Thursday.

The country’s defence ministry said stations at Jammu, Pathankot and Udhampur were “targeted by Pakistani-origin” weapons, and added “the threats were swiftly neutralised”.