🔗 Share this article

Government documents indicate that ministers proceeded with a ban on the activist network notwithstanding receiving warnings that such steps could “accidentally amplify” the organization’s profile, as shown in recently uncovered government documents.

Background

This advisory report was drafted three months before the official proscription of the network, which came into being to engage in activism designed to curb UK military equipment sales to Israel.

The document was prepared in March by officials at the interior ministry and the housing and communities department, aided by anti-terror policing experts.

Survey Findings

Under the title “What would be the proscription of the network be viewed by the UK public”, one section of the report cautioned that a proscription could prove to be a controversial issue.

The document characterized the network as a “modest single issue organization with lower mainstream media exposure” compared to similar direct action groups such as Just Stop Oil. Yet it highlighted that the network’s direct actions, and arrests of its supporters, had attracted media attention.

Officials noted that polling suggested “increasing discontent with Israel’s defense operations in Gaza”.

Leading up to its central thesis, the report mentioned a poll indicating that three-fifths of the UK public thought Israel had gone too far in the hostilities in Gaza and that a comparable proportion favored a restriction on weapons exports.

“These constitute stances upon which PAG builds its profile, campaigning directly to resist Israel’s weapons trade in the United Kingdom,” it said.

“If that PAG is proscribed, their public image may accidentally be enhanced, attracting sympathy among similarly minded individuals who oppose the UK involvement in the Israeli arms industry.”

Other Risks

Experts stated that the citizens were against demands from the certain outlets for harsh steps, like a outlawing.

Other sections of the document referenced research saying the public had a “general lack of awareness” concerning Palestine Action.

Officials wrote that “a significant segment of the UK population are likely at this time uninformed of the group and would remain so should there be outlawing or, should they learn, would remain largely untroubled”.

This proscription under terrorism laws has resulted in protests where numerous people have been apprehended for carrying signs in open spaces stating “I am against mass killings, I support the network”.

This briefing, which was a social effects evaluation, noted that a proscription under terrorism laws could heighten inter-community strains and be viewed as government partiality in toward Israel.

The document cautioned ministers and high-level staff that proscription could become “a catalyst for major debate and criticism”.

Aftermath

One leader of Palestine Action, said that the report’s predictions had come true: “Knowledge of the issues and backing of the organization have surged significantly. This proscription has been counterproductive.”

The interior minister at the time, the minister, declared the outlawing in last month, shortly following the group’s activists supposedly committed acts at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire. Government representatives stated the destruction was significant.

The timing of the briefing demonstrates the ban was being planned well before it was revealed.

Ministers were informed that a outlawing might be seen as an assault on individual rights, with the advisers stating that some within the cabinet as well as the general citizenry may view the decision as “a creep of terrorism powers into the area of liberty and activism.”

Government Statements

An interior ministry official commented: “The group has engaged in an growing wave entailing property destruction to the UK’s national security infrastructure, coercion, and claimed attacks. Such behavior places the protection of the citizens at danger.

“Judgments on outlawing are not taken lightly. They are based on a thorough evidence-based system, with contributions from a broad spectrum of experts from across government, the authorities and the Security Service.”

A national security official commented: “Judgments regarding outlawing are a matter for the government.

“Naturally, national security forces, alongside a range of additional bodies, regularly offer data to the interior ministry to support their work.”

The document also disclosed that the executive branch had been funding periodic studies of community tensions connected to the regional situation.