Starmer, Hormuz, and Hondurasgate

Keir Starmer announced he’s leaving 10 Downing Street - who will replace him, and what can other politicians learn from his early departure? We’re also covering Denmark’s coalition government, the European Parliament’s vote on deportations, Colombia’s presidential election, the potential impact of Hondurasgate in Latin America, and why the U.S.’s negotiating team keeps failing to completely reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Catch up on world news in under 12 minutes! 

Be sure to follow us on Instagram @thefridaybrief and sign up for The Friday Brief newsletter on thefridaybrief.com. 

Transcript

Welcome to The Friday Brief, a news podcast by Girl Friday. I’m Phoenix Ricks, the CEO of Girl Friday and your host. This is your brief for June 23, 2026. Despite vocal concerns from the MAGA base, especially in farm country during the Argentina bailout debacle, Donald Trump has not given up his focus on Latin America. The AP reported that Trump-endorsed outsider Abelardo de la Espriella appears to be Colombia’s next president, adding to the right-wing stronghold in Latin America. De la Espriella, who is nicknamed The Tiger, focused on crime during his campaign, and he went so far as to suggest building mega prisons like those in El Salvador. So, of course, he was endorsed by Donald Trump. But here’s where things get even more interesting. A massive scandal known as Hondurasgate erupted this spring and was covered extensively by media in the Western Hemisphere, well, except in the United States. According to Democracy Now, one of the only U.S. outlets to cover it, “a series of leaked audio recordings has revealed the United States and Israel, with the support of Honduras, have been involved in a scheme targeting leftist governments in Latin America.” According to the alleged leaks, they were trying to disseminate propaganda to destabilize Brazil, Mexico, and yes, Colombia. Now, of course, implicated parties have either said this is false or ignored it altogether. But, if you consider that these allegations could be true, is the outcome of Colombia’s election really that surprising? I worked on campaigns to counter political disinformation. If you’re interested in learning more about how to spot and stop that specific type of propaganda, let me know, and I might start a series on the topic. Now, looking at the news from Europe. We’re about to witness yet another shakeup in the UK government. Yesterday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he will step down as leader of the Labour Party and will vacate office within weeks. Remember, he was elected just two years ago, and he had supporters across the country who were excited about his deep experience in human rights law. According to the AP, Starmer is the sixth prime minister in a decade to exit the role prematurely. Former Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham said he will run, and from what I’ve gathered thus far, he stands a chance of winning, and it is unlikely that his policies and public stances will be a massive departure from what we’ve seen under Starmer. What can Burnham, or the next occupant of 10 Downing Street, learn from Starmer’s untimely exit? The enthusiasm for Starmer was very real, but it quickly turned to concern, and he only has himself and his party’s strategy to blame for that. Voters have pointed to how he handled revelations from the Epstein Files, which I’ve previously covered, and how the UK approached Gaza. Now you know, on both issues, I think the UK government’s actions have been superior to the U.S. government’s responses, but that’s not exactly an achievement for Nobel Prize consideration because the bar is incredibly low. Essentially, people who once admired Starmer held him to the human rights standards he set for others throughout his career. And then he failed his tests. I think U.S. politicians, especially Democrats, should learn from Starmer’s public mistakes. To me, Starmer’s demise mirrors Samantha Power’s fall from grace. She served under Obama and Biden, and she went from being one of the most sought-after scholars on genocide to being persona non grata in any respected international affairs circles. That’s what happens when you’re the author of the book “A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide,” and then, while leading USAID of all agencies, you do the bare minimum to demand humanitarian aid corridors in Gaza and stand against the mass slaughter of children. I’m not just describing what critics in the press have recalled of Power’s tenure. I personally tried to help an American company get its infant formula into Gaza through USAID, but I could not do it. I’ve been able to negotiate in the most chaotic global contexts imaginable, in places where the U.S. government doesn’t even have a relationship, let alone a purported allyship, and yet I couldn’t get free donated American baby formula into Gaza through USAID under her leadership. The litmus tests that political figures create for others will be the bar people set for them. It’s something for Democrats to consider before the 2028 U.S. presidential elections if they hope to reclaim the White House for eight consecutive years. Who will be able to exceed the standards they previously set? Now let’s look at Iran, which will certainly be one of the first tests for the next UK prime minister. Things still aren’t going well. If you’ve been following me on Instagram, you know I rarely give percentage predictions in geopolitics, but I said there was a 0% chance that the Trump administration would reopen the Strait of Hormuz quickly or completely. My odds are still at 0% because the U.S. negotiating team proudly lacks diplomatic training. In fact, a few days ago, JD Vance went on Bari Weiss’s network, the once great CBS, to happily declare to Norah O’Donnell that there are diplomatic protocols he just doesn’t understand. Protocols like, I’m assuming, not posting antagonistic language on social media during one of the biggest oil and gas transportation negotiations in world history. The Independent says that Iran “hit back at Donald Trump” yesterday for the latest flagrant violations of basic diplomatic communications. Trump had threatened to “take over the rest of the country” if the Strait of Hormuz closes again. “You make threats; we take action,” was the response from the head of Iran’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission. He added, “The Strait of Hormuz is neither your personal casino nor the backyard of modern-day pirates; these are Iranian sovereign waters, and the ultimate decision rests with the noble people of Iran and its brave armed forces.” As we’ve seen thus far, the U.S. would be incapable of “taking over the rest of the country,” and I believe if the U.S. government tried, the EU would finally activate an iota of courage to stand firmly against the U.S. government. We are placing our allies around the world in a difficult position because the U.S.’s negotiating team fails to meet the minimum requirements of the job. Where the U.S. is failing on diplomacy, Denmark is leading. The Guardian reported that Denmark’s “new government is preparing to formally present its political programme after Mette Frederiksen negotiated a third consecutive term as prime minister, this time at the head of a four-party, left-leaning minority coalition.” You may recall that Denmark’s March elections gave me anxiety because I did not think Frederiksen would win. No one, not in the conservative blue bloc or the liberal red bloc, got enough votes outright to form a coalition government. The King had to call different parties to the palace to try to form a coalition. In the end, it was Frederiksen who made it happen. Not at all a shock to me, because she is one of the best negotiators in the world right now. Remember, she almost single-handedly kept the U.S. government from taking over Greenland, and I don’t think that fight is over. Now here’s where things get tricky for her in Europe. She’s in a left-wing bloc, but she supports right-wing European Parliament members’ immigration policies. According to The Guardian, those far-right policies have been criticized by UN experts. They maintain that the measures, including detaining people for up to two years or sending them to offshore detention facilities, mimic the most notorious ICE tactics in the U.S. and could lead to grave human rights violations. This has rattled some of Frederiksen’s supporters on the left, but has enticed people on the right. Today, the Financial Times reported that she’s essentially comfortable with having “temporary alliances” with the far right. Whether you agree or disagree with these specific deportation policies, the optics are objectively terrible. For instance, after last week’s European Parliament vote to increase deportations across the EU, The Guardian reported that far-right European Parliament members started chanting “send them back.” I watched those proceedings, and they were downright unnerving. Those politicians’ chants and jeers have been widely condemned. The Financial Times says that Frederiksen’s immigration position has put her at odds with Spain. In response to criticism and questions, Frederiksen told the Financial Times, “I don’t have a problem with other political groups or parties supporting my idea. I’m quite pragmatic. I know that it is impossible to make this a reality if I won’t get support from other political groups.” She’s walking a tightrope on a single divisive issue, and there are several possible outcomes, including splintering regional collaboration, which could affect other issues, such as regional support for protecting EU territories abroad. Territories like Greenland. I will certainly be watching to see how this plays out. If you aren’t already following my new Instagram, check me out at xoPhoenixRicks. My Instagram stories are updated daily with news from around the world, and I post reels offering snapshot analyses of current events. Thank you for listening to The Friday Brief. Be sure to send this podcast to your friends. Until next time, I’m Phoenix Ricks, signing off from Washington, DC. Let’s work together for a world of good.