When Donald Trump offended China with a phone call to the premier of Taiwan, it looked like a gaff from an inexperienced politician, but on closer examination Trump appears to be far more contrived. This was perhaps a deliberate provocation, as the opening of negotiations, from a man who prides himself on his ability to do a deal.

When Theresa May said “Brexit means Brexit”, she appeared to be in control, assertive, laying down a clear policy that everyone can get behind. But closer scrutiny of her reveals a politician driving in fog while clinging to the tail lights of the car in front, in the mistaken sense of security. Farage is driving the car in front, and he’s about to spin it off the road.

Trump and May were each elected in an apparent revolt of voter dissatisfaction, but one plays the fool while following a deliberate path, while the other plays the stateswoman as cover for her total loss of control.

China is the same as all developing countries that go through a process of negotiation with the rich world as they industrialise. For example, the lowering of tariffs by the west, in return for the respect of intellectual property by the developing country. But the difference with China is that the country is massive, so the negotiation has been lop-sided, too heavily in favour of China, and against our interests.

China erects numerous invisible barriers against western companies. A good example is the way that foreign internet companies are banned, which allowed Renren to become what appears to be an imitation of Facebook with 60 million users. We can only speculate as to whether the recent American blacklisting of China’s Alibaba website has anything to do with Trump, but his determination to be confrontational with China would make this notion consistent with his views.

In contrast to the method in madness adopted by Trump, the British prime minster appears to have ignorance in her method. At a recent select committee, it wasn’t just Yvette Cooper who was baffled by the inability of May to give a straight answer to a straight question. The Tory chair, Andrew Tyrie, was also exasperated with May’s apparent impersonation of Sir Humphrey from Yes Minister.

Downing Street simply does not have a clue where negotiations will take them, while their opponents, the 27 EU states, appear united in their position – no free market without free movement.

So the difference between Trump and May is diametric. Trump has both an objective and a strategy to achieve that objective. He wants to rebalance the economic relationship between China and the US , and he intends to achieve this by abandoning quiet diplomacy, in return for confrontational negotiation. May’s lack of objective is summed up by telling a journalist that Brexit “will be red white and blue”. She has no clear objective, and no identifiable strategy on how to proceed. She has only a predicament – her promise to deliver the undeliverable.

Labour List readers might be horrified by my assertion that Britain has drawn the short straw when it comes to leaders elected in the last year, as Trump gives every impression of being 100 per cent capitalist, with no socialist concerns. However, once the rhetoric of the election was over, he indicated that he could keep Obamacare, so he is not trying to reverse one of the considerable achievements of the previous administration. The difference with May is that her chaotic course appears to be so disorientated that she cannot even explain where she is going.

Britain is entering uncharted waters, with no compass and not even a lifeboat. What an extraordinary situation: that Trump makes for a bad leader, but May makes for an even worse one.