🔗 Share this article

Official briefings reveal that ministers proceeded with a outlawing on Palestine Action even after being given warnings that such action could “accidentally amplify” the group’s profile, as shown in leaked official records.

The Situation

This advisory paper was drafted 90 days ahead of the legal outlawing of the group, which was established to engage in activism intending to halt UK weapons exports to Israel.

The document was written three months ago by officials at the department of home affairs and the housing and communities department, aided by counter-terrorism policing experts.

Public Perception

Under the subheading “How would the outlawing of the network be regarded by the UK public”, a part of the report warned that a proscription could turn into a controversial matter.

The document characterized the network as a “limited single issue group with lower mainstream media exposure” compared to similar protest movements such as environmental activists. However, it observed that the group’s direct actions, and arrests of its activists, gained media attention.

Officials said that polling indicated “growing dissatisfaction with IDF tactics in Gaza”.

In the lead-up to its central thesis, the document referenced a poll showing that 60% of the UK public thought Israel had overstepped in the hostilities in Gaza and that a comparable proportion supported a restriction on arms shipments.

“These represent positions based on which PAG defines itself, organising explicitly to resist the Israeli military exports in Britain,” officials wrote.

“Should that PAG is banned, their public image may inadvertently be enhanced, gaining backing among sympathetic members of the public who disagree with the British footprint in the Israeli arms industry.”

Additional Warnings

Experts said that the general populace were against appeals from the certain outlets for tough action, such as a proscription.

Additional parts of the report referenced surveys showing the public had a “widespread unfamiliarity” regarding Palestine Action.

Officials wrote that “much of the British public are likely currently unaware of the group and would remain so in the event of proscription or, if informed, would continue generally unconcerned”.

The outlawing under security statutes has led to protests where numerous people have been detained for carrying placards in the streets saying “I reject atrocities, I back the group”.

This briefing, which was a social effects evaluation, noted that a proscription under anti-terror statutes could escalate inter-community frictions and be seen as state favoritism in favour of Israel.

The briefing alerted policymakers and high-level staff that proscription could become “a catalyst for major dispute and censure”.

Recent Events

One leader of the group, said that the document’s advisories had materialized: “Understanding of the concerns and backing of the group have surged significantly. The outlawing has had the opposite effect.”

The interior minister at the period, the secretary, declared the proscription in the summer, right after the group’s activists reportedly caused damage at RAF Brize Norton in the county. Authorities claimed the harm was substantial.

The schedule of the briefing indicates the outlawing was being planned ahead of it was announced.

Policymakers were advised that a outlawing might be perceived as an attack on civil liberties, with the advisers saying that certain people in the administration as well as the wider public may see the measure as “a gradual extension of security authorities into the domain of free expression and protest.”

Government Statements

An interior ministry spokesperson commented: “The network has conducted an escalating campaign entailing vandalism to Britain’s national security infrastructure, intimidation, and alleged violence. These actions endangers the safety and security of the public at risk.

“Decisions on outlawing are not taken lightly. Decisions are guided by a thorough data-supported system, with input from a broad spectrum of experts from various departments, the police and the Security Service.”

A counter-terrorism law enforcement representative said: “Rulings regarding banning are a matter for the administration.

“Naturally, anti-terror units, alongside a range of further organizations, consistently offer data to the interior ministry to assist their work.”

This briefing also revealed that the executive branch had been funding monthly studies of public strain associated with Israel and Palestine.