Theresa May goes to America to hold Donald Trump’s hand. Inside 48 hours of her departure, that quickly infamous executive order on the US travel ban sparks a huge story, variously involving Mo Farah, an Iraqi-born Tory MP, and the clear sense that something fundamental to a lot of people’s view of the US has suddenly been kicked away. And as the saga rolls on, another thing reveals itself: that with Trump in the White House, Britain is set to take a historic step away from Europe and the prime minister apparently determined to reinvent the so-called special relationship, the context for Brexit might have been transformed.

To state the obvious, Trump was not in office on 23 June 2016. Indeed, received opinion still had it that come November, he would easily be defeated by Hillary Clinton. Now, though, his hyperactive first week in power, his bracing view of geopolitics and the time he recently spent with May have surely put a fresh set of tensions into the debate about how we leave the EU – or, indeed, whether we should leave at all – and the international relationships that might take its place.

If hard (or, if you prefer, “clean” Brexit) is by far the most likely option and the prime minister seems to think it necessitates cosying up to the new president, where does that leave us? More specifically, with those parliamentary votes on article 50 looming, might MPs essentially be voting on a choice between whether we keep as close to Europe as possible, or throw in our lot with a US leader who is upturning his country’s reputation and spreading dangerous tensions around the world? Those are high stakes, to say the least: quite apart from the fact that some of them represent constituencies that voted remain, if some Labour MPs are either having doubts or preparing to rebel against their leader, they can hardly be blamed.

Seeing May’s closeness to Trump and hard Brexit as part of the same political manoeuvre is hardly contentious. May put the basic argument herself last Thursday, presenting his election and the course taken by the UK since the referendum as a matter of rediscovered national purpose (“you renew your nation just as we renew ours”), and “the opportunity … to renew the special relationship for this new age”: a chance, she said, for post-EU Britain and Trump’s America “to lead together, again”. The weekend brought evidence of what that means in practice: France and Germany (among other countries) instantly condemning Trump’s moves on refugees and people from predominantly Muslim countries, while May stayed painfully silent.

Jonathan Walker (@jonwalker121) Remarkable statement by Ted Malloch, reported to be Donald Trump's pick as US ambassador to the EU, speaking on BBC's #ThisWeek pic.twitter.com/LDQtyRCdpa

And have a listen to some of the other mood music. The US’s departing EU ambassador says that Trump and his people support the breakup of the European Union. The new president’s most likely choice as his man in Brussels says that he “had in a previous career a diplomatic post where I helped bring down the Soviet Union – so maybe there’s another union that needs a little taming”. And then there is Vladimir Putin: the figure who lurks at the ideological heart of the new populism – and who, whatever May’s warnings to Trump about his relationship with the Russian leader, surely sees a weakened EU and an Anglosphere reorientated around the new US president as something beyond his wildest dreams.

Trump is trading on prejudice – and if May is a true friend she’ll tell him | Sarah Wollaston Read more

Meanwhile, as Labour disquiet increases, Jeremy Corbyn now apparently says he will insist that his party’s MPs vote to trigger article 50 even if none of their proposed amendments to the relevant legislation make the cut. Viewed from one perspective, that might translate as an insistence that Labour MPs – from a “progressive” party, unanimously horrified by Trumpism, supposed to be the opposition – troop through the lobbies and effectively back a shift in Britain’s global relationships that has no progressive elements at all.

We all know the opposing arguments, and they are worth taking seriously: that even if the referendum result is speciously interpreted as consent for hard Brexit, it has to be respected; that many Labour MPs represent areas that voted leave and fear Ukip; that there are two byelections coming up in leave-voting seats, and that the party is in an unbelievably fragile position. But at the same time, I know what many people who fear the Trump/Brexit moment will say: that at a moment so freighted with historic significance, when the UK may be about to trade in an enduring alliance with Europe for a role as the ally of a truly terrifying US president, will it really be Labour MPs’ choice to back the most reckless course imaginable? We shall soon see.