NUMBERS
* 400 people were arrested after six days of rioting in parts of England and Northern Ireland.
* 6,000 police have been mobilized across the country to deal with the expected riots.
ALEX WHITEMAN
LONDON: Riots gripped England and Northern Ireland last week amid a cloud of misinformation and perceived government failures. However, commentators differ on the root causes beyond the claims of “extreme right-wing hooliganism”.
Not since 2011, when the police shooting of a black man sparked days of nationwide riots, has Britain seen such violence, with mobs tearing up shops, torching cars, targeting mosques and even torching hotels hosting asylum seekers. .
Everyone from Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to the world's second-richest man Elon Musk, who compared the scenes unfolding in Britain to a civil war, weighed in on what caused the unrest and what it could mean for the country.
Responding to an attempted arson attack on Sunday at the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, which was housing asylum seekers awaiting a decision on their status, Starmer said rioters would face “the full force of the law”.
“I guarantee you will regret participating in this mess, either directly or through those who staged this online action and then ran away themselves,” he told a press briefing. “This is not a protest, this is organized violence, and it has no place on our streets or on the Internet.”
The severity of the damage to communities and the number of police officers injured was such that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Parkinson, said some of those arrested could face terrorism charges.
Speaking to the BBC, Parkinson said: “If you have organized groups planning activities to promote an ideology and planning really, really serious offences, then yes, we will be looking at terrorist offences.
“Yes, we are prepared to deal with terrorist offences, and I know of at least one case where this is happening.”
Sources who spoke to Arab News disagreed with claims that the violence was anything more than “violent thuggery”. However, they cautioned against dismissing the need to study major social issues.
One education source, who asked not to be identified, said the unrest comes amid a campaign that has stoked legitimate concerns by trying to blame the country's woes on the perceived negative effects of mass immigration.
“Mix that with the misinformation surrounding the identity of the girls' killer that was the catalyst for the riots, and what you're seeing is the chickens coming home to roost,” the source said.
An attack on a children's dance and yoga workshop at a community center in Southport, north of Liverpool, on July 29 left three girls dead and 10 others, eight of them children, injured, believed to be a 17-year-old.
Because of the suspect's age, police were required by law to withhold his identity, inadvertently creating a vacuum that was quickly filled by false information spread on social media that claimed the suspect was a Muslim who had entered the country illegally.
The spread of misinformation has not been helped by the connections of online influencers, who themselves regularly post anti-immigration and anti-Muslim sentiments to advance a political agenda.
Zuheer Al-Shimale, head of research at Valent Projects, a UK firm that uses artificial intelligence to combat disinformation, said identifying the root causes of the riots could prove difficult because there was a mix of deliberate manipulation by those pushing an anti-immigrant agenda and widespread bot activity.
“Since August 3, accounts and networks linked to Reform UK have been active on X and Facebook with statements about two-tier policing,” Al-Shimale told Arab News, referring to the right-wing political party that made gains in the last general elections. elections.
“They're putting a lot of resources into this to test certain lines and narratives and see what sticks, but basically they're suggesting that the police are allowing Muslim thugs to riot while they're targeting 'white patriots' who are just angry.” state of their nation.”
The two-tiered policing proposals focused on the alleged “soft handling” by police of “left-wing, pro-Palestinian” marches that have taken place weekly in London since October 7 and earlier Black Lives Matter rallies.
Based on the scale of the riots alone, the comparison is poor. A recent pro-Palestinian march involving up to 10,000 people left three police officers injured. By contrast, around 750 people rioted in Rotherham on Sunday, leaving at least 12 officers injured.
According to the YouGov poll, opposition to the riots is almost universal across all sections of the public, with Reform UK voters the only group showing a significant level of support at 21 per cent.
Even this is a clear minority: three-quarters of reform voters (76 percent) oppose the riots. Support among other voters is much lower, with only 9% of the Conservatives, 3% of Labor and 1% of the Lib Dems in favor of rioting.
Yet there is sympathy for ideas that incite riots and far-right groups such as the English Defense League, which are believed to be orchestrating the violence.
Indeed, legal immigration to the UK has soared over the past 30 years, while illegal arrivals across the Channel continue despite the previous government's promise to “stop the boats”.
The latest estimates from the Office for National Statistics on migration show that in 2023 around 1.2 million people migrated to the UK and 532,000 people emigrated, bringing net migration to 685,000.
Around 29,000 people were found to have crossed the English Channel in small boats in 2023, compared to 46,000 in 2022, although overall small boat arrivals have increased significantly since 2018.
According to the Oxford University Migration Observatory, the proportion of foreign-born workers employed in the UK has risen steadily over the past two decades, rising from 9 per cent of the employed workforce in the first quarter of 2004 (2.6 million) to 21 per cent. percent in the first quarter of 2024 (6.8 million).
Migrant men were found to be more likely to be employed than UK-born men, but migrant women were less likely to be employed.
Although asylum seekers are not allowed to work, receive housing or substantial social benefits while their claims are processed, parts of the UK public fear that the needs of new arrivals are being put before their own, and their racial makeup the community is changing around them.
Despite this, voter behavior in the recent UK general election suggests that immigration is not a priority issue for most. “A much better (though still imperfect) indicator is national elections,” Noah Karl, a sociologist and right-wing columnist, wrote in a recent article for Aporia magazine.
“Britain held one just a few weeks ago, and the results give little reason to say that the “English” have “had enough” of mass immigration. Fifty-six percent of white people voted for left-wing or progressive parties, and another 26 percent voted for the Conservatives (the de facto pro-immigration party). Only 16% supported the reform.
“In fact, the share of white people who support left-wing or progressive parties has increased since 2019. I say this as someone with broad restrictionist views.
“Now you can say that the situation has changed since the election because of the riots in Leeds, the stabbings in Southport and other incidents. But in reality it has not changed.
“Prior to the last election, white Britons were already exposed to Islamist terrorism, vigilante groups, BLM riots, the 'decolonization' movement, accusations of 'white privilege', etc.
“While the poll shows that most Britons want a cut in immigration, they appear to care more about issues such as the cost of living, housing and the NHS.”
Many commentators therefore place much of the blame on social media platforms for acting as a catalyst for violence, while rioters, fueled by misinformation, seek to emulate the unrest seen elsewhere in the country and beamed to their smartphones.
Part of the blame, however, may lie with the pervasive political discourse in Britain today.
Paul Reilly, senior lecturer in communications, media and democracy at the University of Glasgow, said one of the main reasons could be a lack of accountability for social media platforms that allow the spread of misinformation. But he also pointed to another group.
“I would argue that political commentators, influencers and politicians have played a key role in this by creating a toxic political discourse around migration,” Reilly told Arab News.
“Social media platforms could do more to remove hate speech and misinformation. But they are not considered publishers and are responsible for the content they post. I expect that the debate over temporarily shutting down internet platforms during civil unrest will become a viable policy.”
However, Reilly also disputed Southport MP Patrick Hurley's claim that the violence was solely due to “lies and propaganda” being spread on social media.
Instead, citing his research into the role of social media in political unrest in Northern Ireland, he says that while online platforms were used to spread rumors and disinformation that fueled tensions, such online activity tended to “occur more quickly , which preceded the riots.”
Writing in The Conversation, he said: “If political leaders are serious about avoiding further violence, they should start by moderating their own language.”
However, he added: “Politicians are better off blaming online platforms rather than acknowledging their role in creating a toxic political discourse around asylum seekers and immigration.”
One legal researcher, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Arab News that the riots were a symptom of a failure to address widening wealth inequality, which created space for disinformation to spread.
“It's just a repeat of what we've seen time and time again with utility cuts. In the absence of government accountability, the population will look for the culprits,” the interlocutor said.
“If there is one bright spark, those who went out to clean up after the rioters appear to represent a much larger proportion of the affected communities, suggesting that a government that cares still has buy-in for a better tomorrow.”
