Far-right rioters reveal a much deeper division in British society

For now, peace and order have returned to the streets of Britain after one of the worst incidents in which far-right, ultra-nationalist mobs attacked mosques and hotels housing asylum seekers, physically assaulted police officers and looted shops and other businesses.
The rapid spread of the riots, which took place simultaneously in several locations, suggests that the outbreaks of violence were not spontaneous and that white supremacists were only waiting for an opportunity to give vent to their vicious, racist and xenophobic hatred.
The swift and effective response by the government, police and courts, as well as by anti-racist civil society groups in the form of counter-demonstrations, must not obscure the fact that there is a fundamental problem of racism in the UK, manifested in this case in Islamophobia and anti-migrant sentiment, which cannot be swept under the carpet. Instead, the causes must be thoroughly investigated and addressed.
The scale of this phenomenon cannot be exaggerated, nor can the riots be downplayed or dismissed as attacks by a small, marginalised section of society. One of the most obvious signs that the organisers of these riots were waiting for an opportunity to attack people they felt did not belong in British society was the tragic event that sparked the outbreak of this senseless violence.
It comes after the savage fatal knife attack on three girls at a dance class in the seaside town of Southport in northern England. The person arrested and charged with the unforgivable murder of young girls spending their summer holidays was a British-born 17-year-old from a nearby village.
The police did not consider the incident a terrorist incident, but almost immediately after the incident, posts appeared on social media falsely suggesting that the killer was a Muslim. It cannot be stressed enough that attacks on mosques and the Muslim community cannot be justified in any way, even if he had been a Muslim. In this case, the attacks included setting fire to buildings housing hundreds of people, which could have resulted in massive loss of life.
The riots were the first tough test for Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government since it came to power in July, and it has passed it with impressive results. It may be that those behind the riots were deliberately trying to test a government they see as too liberal and too progressive, particularly on immigration and multiculturalism issues.
The police’s swift response – which resulted in hundreds of arrests, many people immediately charged and more than 20 already sentenced to up to three years in prison – was a clear sign of zero tolerance towards the racist rioters. Given the huge backlog of cases in British courts, many of which have been waiting years to be heard, the aim of this unusually swift application of justice was not only to punish the perpetrators of extreme violence, but also to deter racists from returning to the streets.

The racist thugs may have underestimated the new prime minister, a lawyer who had served as Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions before entering politics and therefore knew the legal system inside out. He also knew that a failure to act quickly and decisively against these obviously organised outbreaks of violence so early in his term could have jeopardised his party’s reign before it had even begun.

Racism and xenophobia in British society should not be ignored or dismissed as a marginal phenomenon.

Yossi Mekelberg

Some commentators have tried to trivialise the riots, portraying them as mere actions by a small group of thugs looking for an excuse to take to the streets. By claiming they are politically motivated or by attributing an ideology to them, the argument goes, we are giving them an undeservedly high value.
Admittedly, exaggerating the number of those involved and the extent of their influence could serve to falsely glorify them as defenders of the country, its society and its culture, and to exploit an innate, nativist fear of “the other.”
Yet, however much the vast majority of Britons may be appalled by the bigotry of the rioters and even more so by their violent behaviour, and although the UK is one of the most tolerant societies in the world, there are strong and dangerous undercurrents in British society, particularly in England, which are as opposed to immigration of any kind – Brexit was a clear expression of this – as they are to modern multiculturalism.
Racism and xenophobia must not be ignored or dismissed as marginal phenomena in British society, as in other Western societies – especially given the fact that they are promoted and unscrupulously exploited by right-wing mainstream politicians.
In a society where describing Muslim women wearing burkas as “looking like letterboxes” did not stop a politician from becoming Conservative Prime Minister, and where a Home Secretary from the same party found it acceptable to stand up in Parliament and describe asylum seekers as invaders, as if they were enemies from a hostile country, the problem obviously goes much deeper.
And this is just a small example of the vicious language used not only to denigrate immigrants, but also to target genuine Brits who happen to be of a ‘different’ ethnicity or religion.
Driving a wedge between communities and exploiting that division by blaming immigrants for the plight of certain sections of society is one of the oldest and dirtiest tricks of right-wing populist politicians. And it has contributed significantly to the racist violence we have witnessed in Britain recently.
In fact, it is the failings of previous governments and the current social structures that leave many people feeling left behind in British society. And to distract from these failings, minorities will have to be used as scapegoats.
The recent general election in the UK ended with a resounding victory for Labour, but also opened the door for the Reform Party, which won four seats in Parliament. Its main characteristic is a national chauvinism that blames immigrants and immigration for all the country’s ills.
There are those who promote nativism and cannot accept that the nature of British society, like that of many other European societies, has changed. They refuse to recognise the contribution of migrants and migration to their nation’s society and economy.
The events of recent weeks and the worrying relative success of parties promoting ultra-nationalism at the ballot box call for a national debate, perhaps even the convening of a Royal Commission, to help define modern Britain and embrace its best values ​​and traditions, while recognising and welcoming the increasingly multicultural nature of society and the contribution it has made to all sections of society.
Instead of rejecting multiculturalism, we must learn to do better and improve the integration of all communities in a modern, fairer and more tolerant Britain.

• Yossi Mekelberg is Professor of International Relations and Associate Fellow of the MENA Programme at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this section are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab News.