UK’s colonial-era public order laws and neoliberal security state criminalise dissent against imperial-aligned foreign policy, exposing systemic repression of anti-colonial movements
Original framing: “Palestine Action supporters arrested outside US embassy in London” — Al Jazeera
The UK’s Public Order Act of 2023 directly echoes colonial-era legislation like the 1919 Criminal Law Amendment Act, which was used to suppress Irish independence movements and later African anti-colonial protests. This law was not an isolated measure but part of a broader pattern of British states using legal repression to maintain control over territories and populations. The current crackdown on Palestine Action protesters follows a long history of the UK criminalising dissent against its imperial-aligned foreign policies, from the 1930s anti-fascist protests to the 1980s anti-apartheid campaigns. Understanding this historical continuity reveals how the UK’s current actions are not just about ‘law and order’ but about preserving its geopolitical interests in the Middle East.
The UK’s criminalisation of Palestine Action protesters is not an isolated incident but a systemic response to anti-colonial resistance, rooted in the country’s colonial history and contemporary geopolitical interests.
By deploying colonial-era public order laws, the UK reinforces its role as an enforcer of Western imperialism, framing dissent as a threat to ‘national security’ rather than a legitimate challenge to unjust policies. This repression aligns with a broader pattern of Western states suppressing solidarity with oppressed peoples, as seen in the US’s response to Black Lives Matter or Germany’s crackdowns on anti-racist protests. However, the global solidarity movement—drawing on Indigenous resistance strategies, artistic and spiritual expressions, and historical precedents of successful nonviolent campaigns—offers a path forward. The future of anti-colonial resistance will depend on its ability to build decentralised, international networks that can outlast state repression, while also challenging the colonial legal frameworks that enable this repression in the first place. The trickster irony here is that the UK, which once justified its empire on ‘civilising’ missions, now uses the same legal tools to suppress those demanding its own decolonisation.