On 25 February 2026, Jewish anti-Zionist groups and other anti-genocide humanitarians will hold a demonstration outside Westminster Magistrates Court. The protest will be in support of three pro-Palestine protesters who have become the first to be charged for allegedly chanting "intifada" at a demonstration in December.
In December, the Metropolitan and Greater Manchester police forces announced they would arrest people for chanting the popular phrase "globalise the intifada" or holding placards displaying it.
The police forces said: "We know communities are concerned about placards and chants such as 'globalise the intifada' and those using it at future protests or in a targeted way should expect" the two forces "to take action".
Abdallah Alanzi, 24, Haya Adam, 21 and Azza Zaki, 60, were arrested at a protest against the Ministry of Justice in Westminster on 17 December. They have been charged with using "threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour intending thereby to stir up racial hatred"
In light of all of this, let's remember that from the very first day that Israeli soldiers set foot on Palestine and started the occupation, the Palestinian people have justifiably fought that invasion and resisted the occupation.
The word Intifada originates in the Arabic root “to shake,” and contextually means uprising and has long been used in Palestine to refer to the ‘shaking off’ of the shackles of colonial domination, including through mass civil disobedience, unity and solidarity, boycotts, divestment and sanctions.
Since the late 1980s intifada has been used to refer to two specific Palestinian uprisings: the First Intifada (1987-1993) and the Second Intifada (2000-2005).
On December 8 1987 the eruption of the First Intifada started in a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip when an Israeli settler identified as Herzel Boukiza rammed his vehicle into Palestinian workers returning home through Erez/Beit Hanoun checkpoint between Israel and Gaza. Four workers from Jabalya and Maghazi in the Gaza Strip were killed in the terror attack. Protests and violence erupted; only to end in 1993 with the signature of the Oslo Accords.
The word Intifada has since become synonymous with the Palestinian unarmed rebellion against Israel’s occupation. The Second Intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, lasted from 28 September 2000 to 8 February 2005. This second mass resistance movement against the Israeli occupation was sparked by then-candidate for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s and his right wing Likud party delegation, stormed the Al Aqsa mosque with thousands of troops deployed in and around the Old City of Jerusalem, Al Quds. therefore violating the terms of the status quo in Jerusalem.
According to the historical arrangement governing the site, which both Jews and Muslims recognize as sacred to their traditions, the compound is administered by the Islamic Waqf. By storming the compound and entering al-Aqsa Mosque with his supporters under heavy military escort, Sharon was signaling that Israel had total control of the site and could disregard centuries-old arrangements between Muslims and Jews.
Sharon's visit was condemned by the Palestinians as a provocation as well as an incursion since his bodyguards were armed. Shortly after Sharon left the site, angry demonstrations by Palestinians erupted outside the compound.
The broader context behind the uprising was the failure of the US-based Camp David negotiations between PM Ehud Barak and Yassir Arafat. What began as a few hundred protesters throwing shoes at Sharon's police escort following prayers at al-Aqsa mosque had within hours erupted into demonstrations across the Palestinian territories, with chants of "we want an intifada". The following day, September 29,in a extremely harsh reaction. Israeli forces opened fire on crowds of unarmed demonstrators in al-Aqsa compound, killing seven and wounding more than 100.
"People are being massacred! Bring the ambulances," echoed from the mosque's loudspeakers. Demonstrations raged throughout the West Bank and Gaza. Israeli forces repeatedly met the stone-throwing crowds with live ammunition.
In Gaza, a French broadcast crew captured footage of a boy called Mohammed al-Durrah https://teifidancer-teifidancer.blogspot.com/2013/09/in-memory-of-mohammed-al-durrrah.html being shot repeatedly by Israeli forces as he clung to his father. Moments later, a paramedic from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society was killed as he attempted to treat the boy and his father.The scene assumed iconic status as it was shown around the world demonstrating Israel's blatant violence against Palestinians.
Inside the Green Line, too, riots took hold in Palestinian communities, with 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel killed in the first days of protests As the intensity of the demonstrations increased, so too did international and human rights groups' condemnation of Israel's violent attempts to suppress what was quickly becoming an uprising.
Malka, the head of Israeli military intelligence at the time, said that Israeli forces fired more than 1,300,000 bullets in the territories in the first month alone."This is a strategic figure that says that our soldiers are shooting and shooting and shooting," Malka said about what amounted to some 40,000 rounds a day."The significance is that we are determining the height of the flames."
Palestinian stone-throwers were met with Israeli snipers; gunmen, with helicopter gunships and tanks. Whereas the first intifada (1987-1992) was defined by popular protest, general strikes and stones - and to be sure, harsh Israeli counter-measures, including the infamous order by Yitzhak Rabin to break the bones of stone-throwing Palestinians - it was immediately clear that this new uprising was different. Demonstrations were being met with overwhelming force by Israel and it made popular protest impossible. Some analysts point to this overwhelming force by Israeli forces as the reason why the phase of popular protest in the Intifada ended quickly, and armed resistance took its place.
In February 2001, the Israeli public backed the strategy when General Sharon was elected prime minister. While suicide attacks came to define the Palestinian armed struggle, these operations did not begin in earnest until more than a year into the uprising, and after the deaths of more than 400 Palestinians.
Against a heavily armed and armored Israeli force, the kind of guerrilla warfare that the Palestinians had access to - namely, ambushes, shooting attacks and defensive armed struggle - was strictly limited and of marginal impact.
While Hamas and Islamic Jihad carried out the most attacks, all factions were involved - including secular elements of Fatah's al-Aqsa Brigades and the leftist PFLP. The Second Intifada also had a prominent unarmed character that was largely overlooked by mainstream media, with local Palestinian communities organizing predominantly nonviolent actions to combat the expropriation of Palestinian land by Israeli settlements and the illegal Separation Barrier.
Israeli and international civilians were also involved in many of these actions Israel's campaign to suppress the uprising took a heavy toll on ordinary Palestinians.During the Al Aqsa Intifada, Israel caused unprecedented damage to the Palestinian economy and infrastructure. Israel reoccupied areas governed by the Palestinian Authority and began construction of its separation wall.
Significantly, the Palestinian leadership was also decimated by a concerted campaign of assassination.While some assassinations were ambushes by undercover Israeli units, helicopters increasingly became a fixture of Israeli attacks. Helicopter gunships and anti-tank missiles were used on cars, offices and homes.They hovered over Palestinian cities and refugee camps.
Avi Dichter, Israel's internal security chief during the intifada, characterized the policy by stating simply: "When a Palestinian child draws a picture of the sky, he doesn't draw it without a helicopter." Between November 2000 and September 2004, Israel carried out at least 273 assassinations, according to data compiled by the Institute for Palestine Studies.High profile assassinations included Abu Ali Mustafa, the general secretary of the PFLP, in 2001, and the top Hamas leaders and founders, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz Rantissi, in 2004. Perhaps most notoriously, in July 2002, Israeli warplanes dropped a 2,000-pound bomb on a Gaza apartment building that housed Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades commander Salah Shehade and his family.
The Hamas founder was killed along with 15 others, including his wife and nine children. The Shehade assassination led to notable criticism, even within Israel, where it inspired the so-called "pilots' letter" - a declaration by several Israeli air force pilots refusing to carry out bombing raids over the occupied territory. The then leader of the Palestinian Liberation Orgnisation (PLO) Yasser Arafat’s headquarters was also demolished and besieged by Israeli forces.
In what is perhaps the defining moment of the Intifada, in the Jenin refugee camp, Palestinian fighters held off the Israeli offensive of more than 1,000 soldiers during several days of fierce fighting to effectively enter the camp with ground troops, Israel responded by bombing the camp with helicopters and warplanes, shelling it with tanks, and ultimately bulldozing a massive section of the camp - leaving 4,000 homeless according to Human Rights Watch.
In 10 days, 52 Palestinians and 23 Israeli soldiers were killed in what became known as the Battle of Jenin. In April 2002, Israel invaded the West Bank en masse in an operation titled "Defensive Shield", and reoccupied Palestinian cities and towns in the largest military offensive in Palestinian territory since 1967. According to a report by the UN secretary general, 500 Palestinians were killed and more than 6,000 were arrested during the campaign.
Unlike the First Intifada, which ended at the signing of the Oslo Accords there is no clear ending date to the Second Intifada. Some claim the uprising ended with Yasser Arafat's death in November 2004, while others say it culminated with a truce signed in February 2005 between Abbas and Sharon, then-Prime Minister of Israel, in Sharm al-Shaikh, Egypt where it.was agreed to the resumption of talks to reach the so called “two state solution”.
Sharon also agreed to release 900 of the 7500 Palestinian prisoners being held at the time and to withdraw from West Bank towns that had been reoccupied during the Intifada. Israel, however, never fulfilled its end of the bargain, which comes as no surprise.
Two days later, Hamas contested the ceasefire and fired rockets at an illegal settlement near the Gaza Strip. The move prompted Abbas to sack senior security officials within the group, causing tension within Palestinian factions. The rift grew the following year when Hamas triumphed over Fatah in elections. Ongoing disputes between the groups often led to violent confrontations and in 2007 Hamas eventually asserted control over the Gaza Strip, leaving Fatah to retreat to the West Bank.
The Intifada was, and still is, an expression of a deep disappointment and frustr.ation over the ongoing disrespect and denial of basic rights for Palestinians caused by the occupation – including the right to free access to Jerusalem, security and development, and the refugees’ right to return. Whilst Palestinians made some material gains as a result of the intifada, after the ceasefire Israeli aggression intensified and human rights violations increased. The peace process was stalled for many years as Israel vehemently opposed a two-state solution.The settler community have also been emboldened, with greater construction and government support for illegal settlement activity.
The slogan “Globalise the intifada” is used mainly by pro-Palestinian activists as an effective means of building worldwide resistance to what they describe as Israeli settler-colonialism, US imperialism and connected systems of oppression. They present it as a call for international solidarity actions such as protests, boycotts, divestment campaigns, strikes, and direct action, and for connecting the Palestinian struggle to other anti-colonial and anti-racist movements worldwide.
The vast majority of those who chant it insist they are not calling for violence and that resistance can be carried out through nonviolent or civil forms.Despite its ordinary meaning, the UK Israel lobby in and out of government is determined to present the word as an antisemitic call for the ‘killing of all Jews’ instead of a call for Palestinian freedom from occupation and self-determination.
Holocaust survivor descendant Mark Etkind said: Where will this attack on free speech end? Will people next be arrested for using words like ‘democracy’ or ‘freedom’? With some countries already banning the slogan ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!’, the answer to that question is, probably: ‘yes’."
Claims by Keir Starmer and other politicians that such slogans are antisemitic have no basis in fact. They are just cynical inventions to justify repression of a pro-Palestine movement which has always had numerous Jewish participants.
let's not forget over 1.5 million Palestinians – 65 percent of the 2.3 million population of Gaza – have now been internally displaced in the densely populated ‘open-air prison’.
Aligning with Palestinian civil society and the many Jewish voices that seek to untangle Zionism and the actions of the Israeli state from Judaism and Jewish identity, it is essential to place these devastating statistics in their context of settler colonialism.
Nonetheless, the former U.K. Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, described the hundreds of thousands of demonstrators demanding a ceasefire in Gaza as guilty of participating in “hate marches“. In a letter to all UK Chief Constables, she instructed police to ensure “a strong presence” and criminalise “offensive chants, placards or behaviours” at such demonstrations, including waving of a Palestinian flag, which she deems as “intended to glorify acts of terrorism”.
But as Palestinians bear the murderous weight of the colonial present, materialised in an unprecedented scale of genocidal military force, streets and cities across the world have been seething and screaming, calling first for an immediate ceasefire, and secondly for decolonisation and a dismantling of Israel’s apartheid regime in a clear moral litmus test for the world.
As global solidarities and movements, progressive voices and critical analysis are increasingly silenced, and censored, we must speak truth to power, even as it is becoming ever harder to do so.
As Angela Davis has said “We have to believe that it is possible to make change and we can’t give up. We can’t not hope because hope is the condition of all struggles.”
Arresting people for expressing support for an uprising against an illegal occupation highlights a disturbing pattern of targeting those who stand in solidarity with Palestinians. What we are witnessing here is a clear attempt to clamp down on pro-Palestinian freedom of expression and stifle public debate, and a disturbing shift in the state and agencies’ priorities, targeting peaceful protest instead of investigating and holding perpetrators of war crimes accountable.
Even the Crown Prosecution Service has advised that the use of the word “intifada” does not meet prosecution thresholds, yet the Metropolitan Police proceeded anyway and made arrests. In the absence of any changes in the law, this represents an abuse of police powers, and an overreach of the Public Order Act,designed to chill dissent and suppress lawful debate on issues of international justice. Beyond being a clear attempt to supress on pro-Palestinian protest, these actions punish people for expressing support for Palestinians living under Israeli occupation and enduring ongoing violence, ongoing human rights abuses, and apartheid. Policing speech in this context effectively criminalises people fromspeaking out against systemic oppression, genocide, and illegal occupation.
This also exposes the misaligned priorities of the state. Rather than holding perpetrators of war crimes to account, resources are being devoted to policing those defending Palestinian rights. If this continues, where does it stop? Which pro-Palestinian slogan will be next to face criminalisation? This sets a dangerous precedent for the erosion of freedom of expression in the UK and marks another troubling low in the suppression of protest in support of Palestinian rights. And when you start to violate people’s basic rights to free speech for one political purpose, you open the door to people to start doing that in so many different arenas.
As Palestinians continue to bravely confront ethnic cleansing and genocide, the call 'Globalise the intifada’ about resisting oppression and the desire for freedom and the belief that all colonized and oppressed people have the right to take back their land, to realize self-determination, and to win their liberation by any means necessary is so relevant.
Aspirations for peace, justice and equality for everyone in historic Palestine, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, or background, have regularly been articulated by speakers at demonstrations.They are always met with enthusiastic applause. When the numerous Jewish participants chant ‘long live the intifada’, they are not calling for violence against themselves and other Jews: they are calling on society to support Palestinians in their struggle against Zionist oppression and genocide. It is resented by Zionists as it evokes the struggle of the Palestinian people against military oppression and subjugation.
"Globalise the intifada" is a call for solidarity with Palestine which helps highlight the atrocities that Israel inflicts on the Palestinians, and resonates in the same way as "We shall overcome" did in the 1960s civil rights marches.
The bottom line is that Palestinians have endured 77 years of illegal occupation, oppression, ethnic cleansing, forced displacement, home demolitions, blockades, collective punishment, arbitrary detention and torture, and settler violence and that Israel has murdered thousands of innocent, defenceless Palestinians over the last two years.
Perhaps our ignorant, racist, and very and very much owned politicians and media should focus on these important issues, not on slogans they don't even understand. And remember that where there is oppression, global resistance will always thrive.
The phrase “globalize the intifada” has drawn criticism because of fears among Jewish people that it suggests support for the use of targeted violence against Jews around the world. Critics, including Jewish organizations and lawmakers, argue that this slogan is not merely a call for political action, but a direct invocation of the violence from the First and Second Intifadas.
It is in my understanding not a call to violence against Jewish people, though some would love you to think it is. It’s a simple call for showing solidarity with Palestinians before it is too late for them, and for us. It is about throwing sand in the cogs of a machinery of oppression before it grows too powerful to be confronted.
The latest bad faith campaign to suppress criticism of Israel and crimes against Palestinians has already failed. We can never unsee all that we’ve seen. Israel is still committing genocide and crimes against humanity and has killed more than 71,000 Palestinians since October 2023 while Palestinians still cling to the hope of deserving to live free and safe on their land.
Beneath the burgeoning death toll across Palestine are global systems of power, rooted in the logic, history and present of colonial violence. As such, in the face of all of this, the intifada, the ‘shaking off’ of colonial dynamics of racism, violence, dehumanisation and division as we are witnessing has already been globalized.
And when an entire people can be cast aside, dehumanised, murdered and imprisoned, on a daily basis the call of intifada is the only appropriate response. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Long live the Intifada.
