Image and reality of the Palestine solidarity protests

JVL Introduction

This resource for activists contrasts the image of the pro-Palestinian demonstrations projected by the government and its media acolytes with the reality revealed in the Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons recently released a report ‘Policing of protests’ .

We would add to the author’s statement that “The government, and its sycophants in the Tory media, have worked diligently to convince the public that the Palestine solidarity protests of recent months have been characterised by violence, thuggery, and intimidation.”

It is not only the government, and its sycophants in the Tory media. The Labour leadership has showered itself in shame, too, and has not come out unambiguously in support of either the right to protest or of the rights of the Palestinian people.

This resource has been produced by one of our members. Do suggest other topics you would like such summaries on and we will get to work. Or send us drafts to get us going!

RK

Image and reality of the Palestine solidarity protests

The government, and its sycophants in the Tory media, have worked diligently to convince the public that the Palestine solidarity protests of recent months have been characterised by violence, thuggery, and intimidation. The following examples will suffice to prove our claim:

Emphases added.

• Parliament caved to threats of violence from a mob of Islamist and far-Left extremists (Robert Jenrick, Tory MP and former immigration minister, 2 March 2024)
• What started as protests on our streets, has descended into intimidation, threats, and planned acts of violence … Now our democracy itself is a target. (Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, 1 March 2023)
• We need action, ban blooming hate marches, drag them off the street, and lock them up! (Andrea Jenkyns, Tory MP and former parliamentary undersecretary, 1 March 2024)
• The truth is that the Islamists, the extremists and the anti-Semites are in charge now. They have bullied the Labour Party, they have bullied our institutions, and now they have bullied our country into submission. (Suella Braverman, Tory MP and former home secretary, 22 February 2024)
• the House of Commons’ business is now being determined by thugs who physically intimidate MPs, attack their offices, threaten violence if their views aren’t adhered to. (Sebastian Payne, commentator, 22 February 2024)

So much for the image of the Palestine solidarity protests.

Now for the reality: what has actually been happening during protests over the past few months? The Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons recently released a report titled ‘Policing of protests’ (published 27 February 2024). The committee took evidence from several witnesses, including protest organisers and the police, in December. It says (all emphases added):

These protests have been characterised as peaceful overall, by both Israel-Gaza protest organisers, and police representatives … Matt Twist, Assistant Commissioner for Met Operations, said “I am very clear in saying that the overwhelming majority of people on these marches are there to do so lawfully and peacefully”. CC Haward added “overall, we have seen very peaceful protests, given the numbers that have turned out”. (p. 14)

According to the report, from 7 October 2023 to 6 December 2023, there were over 900 protests (p. 13). In total, these protests involved at least hundreds of thousands of people; in London alone, for a single day in November, figures from 300,000 to 800,000 attendees have been reported. The number of arrests has been miniscule in proportion to the number of protesters:

On 1 December 2023 the Met issued a statement which said there had been 289 arrests during protests or other public gatherings relating to the conflict in the Middle East. (p. 14)

The argument of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, Community Security Trust director Dave Rich, and Lord Walney, the government’s adviser on political violence and disruption, is that arrests only count misconduct that the police have been able to identify, locate, and stop. They suggest that there is other misconduct which is not being punished. To this there are four answers:

1. Arrests alone do not prove an offence has been committed: we would have to see how many people have been charged, and how many have then been convicted, for a more accurate picture.
2. It has never been suggested that the 289 figure refers only to Palestine solidarity protesters. According to the Home Affairs committee report, the 289 figure refers to ‘arrests during protests or other public gatherings relating to the conflict in the Middle East’ (p. 14). On the 11 November Armistice Day protests, ‘There were 126 arrests made on the day. Some 100 of these arrests were of far right extremist counter-protesters, who caused severe disruption across central London, including near the Cenotaph in Whitehall and in Vauxhall along the Israel-Gaza protest march’ (p. 17). Assuming that these arrests are included in the 289 figure, it would follow that far right protesters account for slightly over one third of total arrests between 7 October and 6 December 2023.
3. The evidence suggests that the police have been keen to arrest some attendees of the solidarity marches—this is unsurprising given the amount of political pressure they are under. According to AC Twist, the Met Police have been using sophisticated technology to monitor protesters: ‘you may have seen some of our Voyager tactics, looking at social media live, looking through the lens of enhanced CCTV that we have put up and have specialists watching, and then using tools like retrospective facial recognition to identify individuals and guide people in to make arrests.’ (p. 20).
4. No credible evidence has been supplied proving that misconduct has gone unpunished in a large number of cases. The only evidence cited in this connection, by Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, is that ‘there are plenty of videos and photographs of it’ (p. 33), presumably on social media. This is obviously not reliable proof that misconduct is widespread at demonstrations; such pictures and videos can only ever provide a snapshot of behaviour in the context of protests attended by thousands or hundreds of thousands of people. And given the political situation, it is easy for such pictures and videos to be dishonestly cherry-picked.

As for the protest organisers, who have been calumniated as ‘extremists’, they have a good working relationship with the police:

Policing representatives told us they had a good relationship with protest organisers. CC Haward said “Overall, the communication and engagement with those who organise protests has been very good”. AC Twist told us that their engagement with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, as principal organisers of the protests, has been good. He explained “they are telling us when they are going to do either national callout protests or local events in London”. But, he added there have been occasions where “communication has not been as good as we would like”. (p. 24)

The inadequate communication referred to seems to be, that the police want the organisers to condemn ‘unacceptable and potentially illegal behaviours at the events’ (p. 24). On the other hand, the protest organisers feel that the police have mischaracterised the demonstrations (p. 24).

There have been some protests outside MPs’ homes, but these have been small in number, and have not been organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (p. 17). The report does not present any evidence of such protests having a serious disruptive effect.

The report also mentions protests directed at MPs’ offices:

No one should be intimidated when they are coming and going from their place of work. AC Twist said: “Places of work seem to be a legitimate place to protest.” However, MPs have raised concerns about the impact on the staff who work in their offices, who are facing intimidation and violent attacks. We were pleased to hear the Met reiterate that in a democratic society elected representatives must be able to do their job in accordance with their consciences, and free from intimidation. (p. 18)

No evidence of either intimidation at MPs’ offices or violent attacks against MPs or their staff is supplied in the report. It is certain that MPs face abuse; but it is irresponsible for the report to suggest there have been ‘violent attacks’ against MPs’ staff without substantiation. It is also odd that the report does not consider abuse or threats directed at MPs critical of Israel, especially those of Muslim or ethnic minority backgrounds.

In summary, there is no reliable evidence to support the claim that the Palestine solidarity protests have been violent, intimidatory, thuggish, or criminal. This image is entirely a media invention, which we suspect is designed to distract the public from the government’s complicity in what the International Court of Justice considers a plausible genocide in Gaza. It should not be forgotten that aiding, abetting, inciting, and concealing genocide are crimes under British and international law. The war crimes team of the Met Police have been given evidence of the involvement of senior British officials in such crimes and are deciding whether to open a formal investigation.

We will conclude by answering a possible objection. It may be said, that even if the statements of the Tories are not an accurate depiction of the protests between October and December, up to when the report’s evidence was collected, they are an accurate depiction of the protests since then. To prove this claim would require evidence that an overwhelmingly peaceful protest movement has, in just the past two months, become violent and riotous. No such evidence has been provided. Until facts are adduced to support the claim, it is right to dismiss it.

The table below summarises the misrepresentations of Tory propaganda