On December 17, 2025, the Metropolitan Police and Greater Manchester Police issued a joint and forceful warning: protesters chanting or displaying placards with the phrase “globalise the intifada” will now face arrest. This announcement marks a decisive shift in police policy, catalyzed by the tragic massacre at Bondi Beach, Australia, just two days prior, where 15 people were killed and 40 wounded during a Hanukkah celebration. The attack, widely seen as antisemitic, has shaken Jewish communities worldwide and sent ripples through the United Kingdom’s public discourse on protest, speech, and solidarity.
In their statement, Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley and Greater Manchester’s Chief Constable Sir Stephen Watson explained the rationale behind the new approach: “Violent acts have taken place; the context has changed. Words have meaning and consequence. We will act decisively and make arrests.” According to The Independent, the police emphasized that frontline officers will be briefed on this enhanced approach and will use powers under the Public Order Act, including imposing conditions around London synagogues during services.
The phrase at the heart of the controversy, “globalise the intifada,” has become a lightning rod for competing interpretations and political anxieties. The word ‘intifada,’ as explained by the Institute for Middle East Understanding and echoed by Middle East Eye, is Arabic for “to shake off” or “to rise up.” For many pro-Palestinian activists, it symbolizes resistance—sometimes peaceful, sometimes not—against Israeli occupation. But pro-Israel organizations and many Jewish community leaders interpret the chant as a call for violence, especially in the wake of recent attacks targeting Jews.
The December 15 massacre in Sydney, which unfolded as over 1,000 people gathered to celebrate Hanukkah in the Archer Park area of Bondi Beach, was carried out by Naveed Akram, 24, and his father Sajid Akram, 50. According to police reports cited by The Independent, Sajid Akram was shot dead by officers at the scene, while Naveed Akram remains under armed guard in hospital, charged with 15 counts of murder and a litany of terrorism offenses. The attack, described by the Community Security Trust (CST) as “abhorrent,” has left Jewish communities in the UK feeling “frightened and vulnerable.”
For many, the police’s new stance is long overdue. The CST, a charity dedicated to protecting British Jews, welcomed the announcement, stating, “For many years, CST has called for tougher action against hateful and violent chants and placards at protests and this announcement comes not a moment too soon. In particular, given the wave of terrorism against Jews around the world, it is intolerable that a call for a global ‘intifada’ should be allowed on our streets.” The Board of Deputies of British Jews echoed this sentiment, calling the police intervention “necessary” and emphasizing that it came after repeated urging from Jewish organizations.
Chief Crown Prosecutor Lionel Idan, hate crime lead for the Crown Prosecution Service, also weighed in, stating, “Our thoughts are with the Jewish community following the abhorrent terror attack on innocent people in Sydney as they started to celebrate Hanukkah. We are already working closely with police and communities to identify, charge and prosecute antisemitic hate crimes and we will always look at ways we can do more.” He noted that the government’s ongoing hate crime review aims to strengthen legal tools for prosecuting such hatred and deterring offenders.
But the move has not gone unchallenged. Civil liberties groups, human rights advocates, and pro-Palestinian organizations have condemned the decision as a dangerous escalation in the criminalization of protest and free speech. Ben Jamal, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), told The New Arab, “The statement by the Met and GMP marks another low in the political repression of protest for Palestinian rights. The horrific violence that politicians now point to should not be used as a justification to strip away fundamental democratic rights or to demonise an entire movement calling for freedom, justice and equality for Palestinians.”
Jamal further criticized the lack of consultation with Palestinian groups and organizers before the announcement, arguing, “The implication that slogans supporting Palestinian liberation can only be interpreted through the lens of those complicit in Israel’s crimes is deeply dangerous.” Ismail Patel, chair of Friends of Al-Aqsa, told Middle East Eye that “‘globalising the intifada’ is simply a way of expressing global solidarity with efforts to end an illegal Israeli occupation and to strive for a just peace.”
The debate over the phrase’s meaning is hardly new. As Middle East Eye and the Institute for Middle East Understanding note, intifada has a complex history. While the term gained prominence during the first Palestinian uprising in 1987—an event characterized by mass civil resistance, strikes, and boycotts—it has also been used to describe violent resistance. Pro-Israel groups routinely portray the term as a call for violence against Jewish people, while Palestinians and their supporters insist it refers to collective resistance against occupation and oppression, not attacks on civilians.
The police’s announcement comes amid mounting political pressure to clamp down on pro-Palestine protests. As The New Arab details, organizations such as Conservative Friends of Israel and Labour Friends of Israel have pushed for tougher measures, while the British government has moved to proscribe the direct action group Palestine Action as a terrorist organization—a decision widely condemned by human rights groups. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, referencing a deadly attack on a synagogue in Manchester in October 2025, has previously stated that the call to “internationalise the intifada” is “a call to attack Jewish communities around the world.”
British Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has also been vocal, stating, “For far too long we have allowed chants such as ‘globalise the intifada’, which incite hatred and which inspire people to engage in hate action. Why is it still allowed?” He linked the meaning of the chant directly to the violence witnessed at Bondi Beach.
Yet, even as the police prepare to brief officers and implement new restrictions, the controversy over the phrase’s meaning and the boundaries of legitimate protest continues to simmer. Pro-Palestinian activists argue that the crackdown undermines the fight against antisemitism by conflating solidarity with Palestinians with hate speech, while many Jewish organizations see the move as a vital step to protect their communities from intimidation and violence.
As the UK grapples with rising antisemitism, fears of further violence, and an increasingly polarized debate over protest rights, the police’s new policy has become a flashpoint—raising urgent questions about the balance between public safety, free expression, and the right to dissent. The coming weeks will test whether this recalibrated approach delivers the security and reassurance its proponents promise, or whether it deepens the divides it seeks to heal.
