博客

A recent decision by the United States government to label UK-based pro-Palestine advocacy group Palestine Action as a transnational terrorist organization has triggered widespread alarm among campaigners, who warn the move will expose UK-linked activists to elevated risks of intrusive surveillance and potential exclusion from the global financial system.

The announcement came via an official statement published on the US Treasury Department’s website, which rolled out a new package of sanctions targeting what it calls “Violent Far-Left Terrorist Networks”. Alongside Palestine Action, the sanctions also target Masar Badil, a Palestinian movement pushing for a revolutionary alternative path to secure Palestinian rights and self-determination, as well as Italian tech collective Autistici/Inventati. The US claims the collective provides specialized digital infrastructure, tools and services to Antifa cells and other violent far-left extremist groups, including a designated foreign terrorist organization.

US officials emphasized that the designation complements the UK government’s 2024 decision to ban Palestine Action under domestic terrorism law, a ruling that is currently scheduled to face a legal challenge at the UK Supreme Court this November.

For activists directly connected to the group, the new sanctions have already created profound uncertainty and fear. Max Geller, a former Palestine Action member and US citizen who resides in the UK, told independent outlet Middle East Eye that he now faces deep anxiety over his financial security and ability to travel. “I have American bank accounts, I don’t know if I’m going to suddenly be de-banked or if every single one of my Paypal transactions with my friends are going to be scrutinised,” Geller said. With elderly parents based in the US, Geller added that the ban could even block family visits, noting “Suddenly going back home has become a very stressful and scary prospect. No one knows what this means yet. They don’t use these laws on American citizens, so no one really knows what it means for people like me.”

Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, described the US economic sanctions as an additional layer of repression stacked on top of the UK’s domestic proscription, one that will make daily life far harder for hundreds of linked activists. “There is so much reliance in the Western world on these institutions that you don’t think about how intertwined they are with the US financial system until you’re at the opposite end of their repression,” Ammori told Middle East Eye. Beyond financial exclusion, Ammori warned the designation amplifies the risk of expanded surveillance through intelligence sharing arrangements between the US and UK governments. “It puts people at more of a risk. The US are known for trying to quash who they perceive as enemies of the American empire, and we are now firmly in their sights,” she said.

Legal and civil liberties campaigners say the far-reaching nature of the US sanctions puts thousands of UK-based supporters at risk of severe consequences. Tim Crosland, a former government lawyer and co-founder of London-based advocacy group Defend our Juries, pointed out that more than 2,700 people have already been arrested in the UK under the 2000 Terrorism Act for supporting Palestine Action. He questioned what the new US designation means for this group: “Are they now in danger of having their bank accounts closed and not being able to operate within the financial system?” Crosland noted that the sanctions already cut off financial access for high-profile critics, pointing to the case of UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine Francesca Albanese, who was sanctioned by the US during the Trump administration last year and has since been locked out of routine financial transactions after calling for the International Criminal Court to prosecute Israeli officials and US company executives accused of complicity in human rights abuses in Palestinian territories.

“Does that apply to people who’ve held up signs saying ‘I support Palestine Action’? Will the British government give the US the personal data of the people who’ve done that? Because they haven’t got the data unless somebody gives it to them,” Crosland added.

The US announcement came just days after new details emerged of a pending terrorism-connected case against seven Palestine Action activists accused of vandalizing former US president Donald Trump’s golf resort in Turnberry, Scotland. In March 2025, the activists are alleged to have broken into the property, dug up sections of the golf course and spray-painted “Gaza is not 4 sale” on the clubhouse. All seven face charges of malicious damage aggravated by a terrorist connection, a designation that can result in longer prison sentences and continued terrorist monitoring for decades after release.

Raza Husain KC, who represented Ammori in a judicial review of the UK’s proscription last November, noted that then UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer held two phone calls with Trump shortly after the incident, on March 10 and 30. Declassified UK reported that the British government has so far refused to confirm or deny whether the two leaders discussed Palestine Action during those conversations. Around the same time, Trump’s son Eric met with Scottish First Minister John Swinney, and a Freedom of Information disclosure showed Swinney “noted with concern the recent incident at the Trump Turnberry property, condemning the damage caused by vandalism and offered reassurance that the relevant authorities would continue to take the incident seriously”. Trump later took to his Truth Social platform to label the activists “terrorists” who had committed “serious damage” — language that echoed the wording of the UK’s 2000 Terrorism Act — and said they would “hopefully be treated harshly”. Ammori argued that the wording makes clear the proscription was discussed: “What emboldened him to use those words after speaking to Starmer? It must have been discussed.”

In recent months, British courts have already begun applying terrorist designations to Palestine Action activists convicted only of property damage, a move that legal experts call unprecedented in UK history. In June 2025, four Palestine Action defendants were sentenced as terrorists in connection with a 2024 raid on an Elbit Systems factory near Bristol. Crucially, the jurors that convicted them of general criminal charges were never informed that prosecutors would seek a terrorist designation, which was determined by the presiding judge during a separate sentencing hearing. This marked the first time British courts applied a terrorist label to direct action protesters who had not been convicted of terrorist offences or intentional violence. In a separate case, Judge Phillip Parry initially announced he would consider applying a terrorist connection to five activists who vandalized a Barclays Bank branch in Lancashire, but Judge Altham rejected the designation at a recent hearing, ruling the damage caused was not substantial enough to warrant the label.

The US designation of Palestine Action adds the group to the Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) list, a regime created just days after the 9/11 attacks in 2001 via then-President George W. Bush’s Executive Order 13224. The first target of the list was the Holy Land Foundation, the largest Muslim charity operating in the US at the time, which resulted in five Palestinian-American men being sentenced to between 15 and 65 years in prison on charges of funding Hamas-linked groups. Notably, no court ever presented evidence linking the men to violent activity.

In its official statement, the US Treasury Department claimed “The United States does not sanction persons for engaging in political speech or other constitutionally protected activities.” But Geller says the designation places Palestine Action in the same legal category as extremist groups like Boko Haram and al-Qaeda, and warns it signals a broader crackdown on dissent. “It seems to be a harbinger for where things are headed. A lot of people might soon find themselves in this position,” he said.

The US action aligns with a broader administration-wide push to crack down on left-wing activist groups under the framing of countering a global “resurgence of far-left political terrorism”. The latest sanctions build on a November 2024 executive order signed by Trump that designated the loose anti-fascist network Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization. In June 2025, a Texas court sentenced anti-ICE protesters accused of Antifa ties to up to 100 years in prison, a verdict widely seen as a test case for the national crackdown on left-wing activism. In July, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted an international summit focused on countering what he called “a deliberate, ideologically motivated strategy to destabilize free societies by violently targeting our political and economic systems”.

Many campaigners have questioned the timing of the US announcement, which comes just weeks after the UK Supreme Court granted Ammori permission to challenge the British government’s proscription of Palestine Action. “Is the Trump administration worried that Palestine Action might prevail at the European Court of Human Rights or in the British Supreme Court?” Geller asked.

The designation also comes shortly after Spanish police arrested US citizen and left-wing humanitarian financier James “Fergie” Chambers at the request of US extradition authorities. Chambers has acknowledged participating in a Palestine Action protest and covering legal fees for some group members, and his lawyers confirm he has donated roughly $1 million to humanitarian projects in Gaza. Ammori revealed that the US submitted its indictment against Chambers on the exact same day the Treasury Department announced the Palestine Action sanctions. Geller argues the timing is no coincidence: “It feels like it’s truly only being done as a PR stunt to build a groundswell of public support for either extraditing Fergie or preempting another Palestine Action legal victory.”

Middle East Eye, which originally reported this story, provides independent coverage of the Middle East, North Africa and global affairs.

Israel’s ultranationalist far-right faction Jewish Power is moving forward with a provocative new outreach strategy targeting young Israelis: launching a children’s book that celebrates the controversial career and policy agenda of its leader, incumbent Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. The illustrated publication, designed to reach a core and fast-growing segment of Ben Gvir’s voter base, will not be distributed through official Israeli educational institutions; instead, party organizers plan to hand out copies directly to young students outside school campuses to maximize grassroots exposure.

Israeli media reports confirm the book was crafted using simplified, accessible language tailored specifically for a child audience. Titled *The Minister Who Didn’t Stop*, the book is scheduled for an official launch at the party’s regional conference in Netanya on September 1, a date deliberately chosen to align with the opening of the Israeli academic year and capitalize on back-to-school momentum.

In an official statement, Ben Gvir’s office defended the project, framing it as a public education effort: “We are proud to launch the children’s book … and through it tell the children of Israel and the entire Israeli people the story of Minister Ben Gvir’s tremendous achievements throughout his four years as minister of national security.”

The push to court young voters comes as support for Ben Gvir and Israel’s broader far-right movement has surged dramatically among younger Jewish Israeli demographics in recent years. Ben Gvir’s young supporters have repeatedly been documented chanting the virulently anti-Palestinian slogan “Your village should burn” at political rallies—a slogan that glorifies the historical destruction of Palestinian villages and advocates for the forced expulsion of all Palestinians from land claimed by Israel.

Data from independent Israeli think tank the Israel Democracy Institute underscores the scale of this ideological shift: 73 percent of Jewish Israelis between the ages of 18 and 24 now identify as right-wing, creating what political analysts describe as fertile ideological ground for extremist politicians like Ben Gvir to expand their influence.

But far from the “tremendous achievements” the book highlights, Ben Gvir’s tenure has been marked by international condemnation and widespread allegations of human rights abuses. A long-time follower of Meir Kahane, an American-born Jewish supremacist whose ideology is classified as terrorist by multiple governments, Ben Gvir has already been convicted by Israeli domestic courts on charges of inciting racial hatred and supporting a banned terrorist organization.

Today, Ben Gvir is a global pariah, barred from entering at least 10 countries over his extremist rhetoric and human rights record, and placed on a Schengen Area watchlist that effectively blocks entry to most of Europe. This international isolation is widely seen as symbolic of the broader global rebuke of Israel’s current government, which faces widespread accusations of carrying out genocide in Gaza and enforcing apartheid policies across the occupied West Bank.

Just weeks before the book launch, Ben Gvir publicly called on Israeli military forces to execute “30 or 40” Palestinian civilians in Gaza every single night, infamously claiming that many Palestinians living in the besieged enclave are “not worthy of life” and “not even people.” When asked in a previous interview whether the racist chant “Death to Arabs” constitutes a moral wrong, Ben Gvir flatly denied the charge, responding “No. I don’t think so.”

Among Ben Gvir’s most controversial policy actions is a series of changes to the Israeli prison system that leading international human rights organizations have condemned as amounting to systematic torture and starvation of Palestinian political detainees. Ben Gvir has personally ordered mandatory cuts to food rations for Palestinian prisoners, openly stating that “One of my top goals … is worsening the prisoners’ conditions.”

This report is original coverage from Middle East Eye, an independent outlet focused on unfiltered reporting and analysis of the Middle East and North Africa region.

The death of prominent Cambridge University sociologist Jason Arday earlier this month has sparked a cascading controversy that pulls back the curtain on long-simmering tensions over academic hiring, free speech, and the growing influence of U.S.-led anti-diversity culture wars in British higher education. New internal documents obtained by Middle East Eye reveal that senior academic leaders at Cambridge privately conceded as early as 2024 that Nathan Cofnas – the self-identified race realist who first brought plagiarism allegations against Arday last month – should never have been hired by the institution in the first place.

Cofnas, who currently holds a postdoctoral research position at Belgium’s Ghent University, has dominated headlines since his unsubstantiated plagiarism claims against Arday spiraled into a relentless media campaign. Arday, a Black sociologist who rose to academic prominence after a non-traditional educational path, resigned from his Cambridge post earlier this month amid the onslaught of coverage, saying he had reached “the limits of what any person should reasonably be expected to endure.” He died shortly after stepping down.

In the wake of Arday’s death, Cofnas has been placed under formal disciplinary investigation and temporarily suspended by Ghent University over the inflammatory public comments he made about Arday, including describing the sociologist as “retarded,” “mentally disabled,” and “just another DEI hire.” Just days after his suspension, however, Cofnas announced he would be allowed to continue his research on campus while the probe moves forward, a outcome he directly credited to public intervention from U.S. Ambassador to Belgium Bill White. White had openly condemned Cofnas’s suspension, stating the Trump administration would re-evaluate its institutional ties with Ghent University over the move. Beyond diplomatic backing from the U.S. government, Cofnas has also received public amplification from tech billionaire and X owner Elon Musk, as well as consistent coverage across a network of right-wing media outlets and podcasts.

Scrutiny of Cofnas’s academic career has now turned back to his previous appointment at Cambridge, where both he and Arday held positions. In 2022, Cofnas was hired as a Leverhulme Trust early career fellow in Cambridge’s philosophy department and appointed a fellow at Emmanuel College. That tenure ended abruptly in April 2024, after Cofnas published a February 2024 blog post advancing extreme racial pseudoscience: he claimed race was inherently linked to academic ability, argued that Black people would “disappear from almost all high-profile positions outside of sports and entertainment” under a true meritocracy, and called for “some barriers set up between races in order for each one to express its own unique genius.”

Internal minutes from a closed-door February 23, 2024 meeting held to address student protests over Cofnas’s remarks, obtained by MEE, lay bare senior leadership’s private misgivings about his hiring. Bhaskar Vira, Cambridge’s pro vice chancellor for education, told attendees that senior university management was widely “outraged” by Cofnas’s comments. Vira noted that while Cofnas held a fellowship at the constituent college Emmanuel, the central university was exploring formal responses, adding that Cofnas had crossed acceptable lines even within the framework of academic free speech – though he cautioned the university needed to seek legal guidance before acting.

Angela Breitenbach, then-chair of the philosophy faculty, openly acknowledged that hiring Cofnas had been a misstep. She told meeting attendees that a simple Google search would have revealed the full extent of Cofnas’s extremist views before the appointment was finalized, admitting the original hiring process was “not satisfactory ultimately.” Breitenbach explained that the process had only involved one or two reviewers who did not fully vet all application materials, and that the university had since revised its protocols to make all applications accessible to the full faculty for review. Associate professor Sophie Dandelet further raised concerns that Cofnas’s extremist racial views would compromise his ability to teach a diverse student body. A student and faculty petition for Cofnas’s dismissal gathered more than 1,200 signatures that March, and Emmanuel College moved to terminate his fellowship shortly after, prompting Cofnas to file a lawsuit alleging belief discrimination. The college ultimately prevailed in court, with the judge ruling Cofnas’s blog post had caused measurable reputational harm to the institution.

The scandal has also cast new light on longstanding questions about Cofnas’s qualifications at his current institution, Ghent University. The Guardian reported this week that Ghent’s own philosophy department raised formal concerns about Cofnas’s appointment as early as May 2024, sending an official statement to the university’s rector questioning his “limited expertise” for the role. An anonymous senior philosophy of science academic quoted by The Guardian described Cofnas’s work as “abysmal” and “shoddy,” accusing him of presenting unproven racial pseudoscience as legitimate science without any supporting evidence. The department’s statement also questioned the transparency of Cofnas’s hiring, noting that out of 14 qualified candidates, it was “very improbable” Cofnas was the best choice, and a large majority of department members suspected his selection was “an ideological choice … decided in advance.” Cofnas has rejected all criticism, stating his academic qualifications are a matter of public record, and framing the scrutiny as an effort to censor his free speech.

The media frenzy surrounding Arday after Cofnas’s initial plagiarism allegations has also come under widespread condemnation for its extreme disproportion. An analysis by media watchdog NewsCord found that in just 22 days after Cofnas’s claims became public, 229 articles were published about Arday across UK media outlets – 188 of those came in the nine days before Arday’s death, averaging 21 articles a day. To put that volume in context, NewsCord noted that only 166 articles were published about Peter Mandelson in the two weeks after the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, a far higher-stakes political scandal. As of this week, more than 218,000 complaints have been filed with the UK’s Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) through NewsCord’s campaign – more than double the previous record for complaints over a single media campaign, and nearly 10 times the number filed against Jeremy Clarkson’s controversial 2022 column about the Duchess of Sussex.

Independent analysis published by Middle East Eye has also cast serious doubt on the core claims against Arday: key biographical claims that attackers claimed were fabricated have been verified as accurate, and the framing of Arday as a habitual, unrepentant plagiarist does not hold up to close examination of his work. Des Freedman, a professor of media and communications at Goldsmiths University, told MEE that the coordinated media campaign against Arday amounted to a shameful partisan attack, not legitimate public interest reporting. “Elements of the press boast that they are watchdogs, but they are also attack dogs,” Freedman said. “Instead of punching up … they punch down,” going after vulnerable people under the guise of acting in the “public interest.” He added that the frenzy was deliberately stoked by a “coordinated, international right-wing movement” that uses figures like Arday as scapegoats to advance anti-diversity, DEI rollback policies that originated in U.S. conservative politics.

Investigative reporting has now exposed deeper institutional and financial ties linking Cofnas’s campaign to influential right-wing U.S. donors. Byline Times reported last week that Cofnas’s allegations against Arday were amplified by a network of groups linked to billionaire Peter Thiel, founder of U.S. spy firm Palantir. After Emmanuel College dismissed Cofnas in 2024, the UK-based Free Speech Union (FSU) – a pro-free speech advocacy group that often backs right-wing academics – launched a public fundraiser for Cofnas, framing him as a martyr for academic freedom. Multiple Byline Times investigations have linked the FSU to a broader network of far-right academics supported by Thiel’s chief of staff. One key figure in that network is James Orr, a Cambridge divinity faculty academic and FSU adviser who hosted a series of controversial talks by Thiel at Cambridge in January, and serves as head of policy for the UK’s right-wing Reform Party, where he is widely described as Reform leader Nigel Farage’s “kingmaker.” U.S. Vice President JD Vance has even called Orr “my philosopher king.”

Additional far-right ties have been uncovered in the network promoting Cofnas’s views. Online magazine Aporia, which published a series of pieces amplifying Cofnas’s allegations against Arday and framed the scandal as “the bitter fruit of equalitarianism,” operates as the public arm of the Human Diversity Foundation – recently renamed Polygenic Scores – an organization that has documented links to the German far-right party Alternative für Deutschland.

Cambridge University has declined to comment on the internal meeting details obtained by MEE, and has not yet issued a new public statement on the broader controversy in the wake of Arday’s death. Ghent University has reiterated that its disciplinary investigation into Cofnas remains ongoing despite his return to campus research work.