LONDON: Riots have gripped England and Northern Ireland in the past week amid a cloud of misinformation and perceived government failures. However, commentators are divided on the root causes beyond claims of “far-right row”.
Not since 2011, when the police shooting of a black man sparked days of nationwide rioting, has Britain witnessed scenes of such violence, with crowds of people tearing through shops, torching cars, targeting mosques and even setting fires in hotels that receive asylum seekers. .
Everyone from Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to the world's second-richest man, Elon Musk – who likened the scenes unfolding in Britain to a civil war – have weighed in on what caused the riots and what they could mean for the country.
Responding to Sunday's attempted arson of a Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, where asylum seekers were being housed pending a decision on their status, Starmer said the rioters would face “the full force of the law”.
“I guarantee you will regret participating in this disruption, whether directly or those who whipped up this act online and then run away themselves,” he told a news briefing. “This is not a protest, it is organized, violent mischief and it has no place on our streets or online.”
So serious was the damage caused to communities and the number of injuries to police officers that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Parkinson, has said some of those arrested could face terrorism charges.
Speaking to the BBC, Mr Parkinson said: “If you have organized groups planning activities to promote an ideology and planning really, really serious disruption, then yes, we will consider terrorism offences.
“Yes, we are willing to look at terrorism offences, and I am aware of at least one case where that is happening.”
Sources who spoke to Arab News disagreed with claims that the violence was nothing more than “violent mischief”. However, they cautioned against dismissing the need to examine underlying societal issues.
One source, who works in education and asked not to be identified, said the disruption has come on the back of an election campaign that exploited legitimate concerns by trying to blame the country's ills on the alleged negative effects of mass immigration.
“Mix this with misinformation surrounding the identity of the girl killer that acted as the catalyst for the riots, and what you see are chickens coming home to roost,” the source said.
This section contains relevant reference points, located in (Opinion Field)
An attack on a children's dance and yoga workshop at a community center in Southport, north of Liverpool, on July 29 saw three girls killed and ten other people – eight of whom are children – injured, reportedly by a 17-year-old.
Due to the suspect's age, police were legally required to withhold his identity, inadvertently creating a vacuum that was quickly filled by false information circulating on social media claiming the suspect was a Muslim who had entered the country illegally.
The spread of false information was not helped by the arrival of influential online influencers who themselves regularly post anti-immigration, anti-Muslim sentiments to bolster a political agenda.
Zouhir Al-Shimale, head of research at Valent Projects, a British company that uses artificial intelligence to fight disinformation, said it can be difficult to identify the root causes of the riots, as there has been a mix of deliberate manipulation by those running an anti- immigrant agenda and widespread bot activity.
“Since August 3, accounts and networks linked to Reform UK have been massively active on X and Facebook with claims of two-pronged policing,” Al-Shimale told Arab News, referring to a right-wing party that made inroads in the last general election.
“They're putting a lot of resources into this to test certain lines and stories and see what sticks, but essentially imply that the police are allowing Muslim thugs to run riot while targeting 'white patriots' who are simply angry about the 'state of for their nation.”
Proposals for bipartisan policing have focused on alleged “soft handling” by police over “left-leaning, pro-Palestine” marches that have occurred weekly in London since October 7, and earlier Black Lives Matter rallies.
Based on the extent of disruption alone, the comparison is poor. A recent pro-Palestine march of up to 10,000 people left three police officers injured. However, the approximately 750 people who rioted in Rotherham on Sunday left at least 12 police officers injured.
Opposition to the riots is almost universal across all sections of the public, according to polling data from YouGov, with Reform UK voters the only group showing any substantial levels of support, at 21 per cent.
This too is a clear minority, with three-quarters of reform voters (76 percent) opposed to the riots. Support among other voters is much lower – only 9 per cent of Conservatives, 3 per cent of Labor voters and 1 per cent of Liberal Democrats favor disruption.
INSPEECH
• 400 people were arrested after six days of rioting in parts of England and Northern Ireland.
• 6,000 police were mobilized across the country to deal with further expected unrest.
Still, there are sympathies with the ideas driving the riots and the far-right groups, such as the English Defense League, believed to be orchestrating the violence.
Legal immigration to Britain has actually increased dramatically over the past 30 years, while illegal arrivals across the English Channel have continued despite the previous government's promise to “stop the boats.”
The latest estimates of migration from the Office for National Statistics suggest that in 2023 around 1.2 million people migrated to the UK while 532,000 people emigrated, leaving a net migration figure of 685,000.
Around 29,000 people were detected crossing the English Channel in small boats in 2023, down from 46,000 in 2022, although overall small boat arrivals have increased significantly since 2018.
According to the University of Oxford's Migration Observatory, the proportion of workers employed in the UK who are born abroad 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 in the first quarter of 2024 (6 .8 million).
It found that immigrant men were more likely to be employed than UK-born men, but among women, immigrants were less likely to be employed.
Although asylum seekers are not allowed to work, nor receive a house or significant social benefits while their applications are being reviewed, some in the UK public fear that the needs of new arrivals are being put before their own, while the racial makeup of their communities is changing around them.
Despite this, the behavior of voters in the UK's last general election suggests that immigration is not a priority issue for most people. “A much better (but still imperfect) indicator is a national election,” wrote Noah Carl, a sociologist and right-wing commentator, in a recent article for Aporia Magazine.
“Britain held one just a few weeks ago, and the results provide little basis for saying that 'the English' have 'had enough' of mass immigration. Fifty-six percent of whites voted for left-wing or progressive parties, and a further 26 percent voted for the Conservatives ( a de facto pro-migration party).Only 16 percent supported Reform.
“In fact, the percentage of white people who support left-wing or progressive parties increased from 2019. I say this as someone with broadly restrictive views.
“Now you could argue that the situation has changed since the election, because of the riots in Leeds, the stabbing in Southport and other incidents. But it hasn't really changed.
“Before the last election, white Britons had already been exposed to Islamist terrorism, grooming gangs, BLM riots, the 'decolonisation' movement, accusations of 'white privilege' etc. Yet they still chose to vote overwhelmingly for pro-migration parties.
“Although polls suggest most Britons want to reduce immigration, they seem to care more about issues such as the cost of living, housing and the NHS.”
Many commentators have therefore placed much of the blame on social media platforms for acting as a catalyst for the violence, while rioters whipped up by disinformation seek to emulate the disorder seen elsewhere in the country and fed to their smartphones.
However, part of the blame may also lie with the pervasive political discourse in Britain today.
Paul Reilly, senior lecturer in communication, media and democracy at the University of Glasgow, said one underlying reason could be the absence of accountability for social media platforms for allowing misinformation to spread. 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 toxic political discourse around migration,” Reilly told Arab News.
“Social media platforms could do better at removing hate speech and misinformation. But they are not treated as publishers and held accountable for content they host. I expect debate about temporary shutdowns of online platforms during civil unrest as a viable policy.”
Yet Mr Reilly has also disputed the claim by Southport MP Patrick Hurley that the violence that unfolded was purely down to “lies and propaganda” 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 have been used to share rumors and misinformation, which has fueled tensions, such online activity has tended to “follow rather than precede riots .”
Writing in The Conversation, he said: “If political leaders are serious about avoiding further violence, they should start by moderating their own language.”
But he added: “It is convenient for politicians to blame online platforms rather than acknowledge their role in producing a toxic political discourse in relation to asylum seekers and immigration.”
A legal scholar, who asked not to be named, told Arab News that the riots were a symptom of failures to address rising wealth inequality, which had created a space for disinformation to spread.
“It's simply a replication of what we've seen time and time again with the cuts to public services. Amid an absence of government accountability, the population will look for someone to blame,” the person said.
“If there is one bright spot, those coming out to clean up after the rioters appear to represent a much higher proportion of the affected communities, indicating that for a government that cares, there is still buy-in for a better tomorrow.”
