A paper published by the Royal Geographical Society has alleged a link between the 2024 Southport riots and the “Zionist project,” prompting outrage from academics.
Published in the society’s flagship Geographical Journal, the peer-reviewed paper suggests that the violence, which it terms “the UK’s first anti-Muslim pogroms,” occurred in “a very specific genocidal context against the Muslim populations of Gaza”.
The riots occurred in the wake of the Southport stabbings, in which 17-year-old Axel Rudakubana killed three young girls at a children’s Taylor Swift-themed dance class.
It later emerged that Rudakubana had previously been referred to the government’s Prevent counter-extremism protests which, combined with misinformation spread online that he was an asylum seeker, prompted sizeable anti-immigration protests in the city.
Clashes then broke out between protestors, including members of far-right groups, counter-demonstrators and police. Much of the violence was targeted at Muslim sites and areas with a sizeable Muslim population, fuelled by speculation that Rudakubana was motivated by Islamist extremism (authorities later found that he had no specific ideology but was referred to Prevent due to his obsession with violence).
However, Dr Kawtar Najib, the paper’s author, wrote that the protests were whipped up by “racist and Islamophobic activists,” specifically naming far-right figure Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, whom she accused of “calling for racist pogroms”.
She then added: “[Robinson’s] are indeed inspired by white supremacist ideology, which is also at the heart of the Zionist project.
“Both call for a civilisation war with the support of important leaders, such as Donald Trump or Elon Musk, who display their sympathy, support and even governance for the extreme right.”
Robinson has consistently rejected allegations that he is a white supremacist.
Najib also cited a paper in American Quarterly of December 2015 by Palestinian-American academic Hatem Bazian, who is now a professor at UC Berkeley, which she said “exposes the financiers of the Islamophobic industry in the United States by explaining that more than 70 per cent of anti-Muslim rhetoric comes from Zionist Israeli sources”.
“Although the primary motivation of far-right rioters in the United Kingdom was above all Islamophobia and racism, their sympathy for Zionism is open and enthusiastic,” she added, citing Iranian state-owned Press TV as a source.
In conclusion, she wrote: “The current genocide in Gaza has not only exacerbated individual anti-Muslim attacks in the United Kingdom but also exposed deep institutional racism, notably in the failure of the UK government to protect innocent Muslims whether on its own soil or in Gaza.
“Islamophobia is a global problem that even affects non-Muslims (e.g. Romanian Christian populations in Hull, Brown and Black refugees and asylum seekers in Europe, Palestinian Christians in Palestine).
“Therefore, the fight against Islamophobia represents a broader anti-racist and anti-colonialist struggle. Ultimately, from Gaza to the United Kingdom, local resilience and counteractions can defeat the current Islamophobic world order.”
The paper has prompted significant backlash from other academics.
George Holmes, a professor of conservation and society at the University of Leeds, told The Telegraph: “The RGS itself must review this episode, reflect on its role in all of this, and explain what changes it seeks to bring in to avoid any repeat of this enormous failure. It needs to ask itself whether it is serious about tackling racism in geography.
“Whilst the piece may not use the word ‘Jew’ its complete reliance on age-old, notorious racist ideas makes it very obviously about race and religion, not about support for political movements.”
Likewise, Mitch Rose, senior lecturer in human geography at Aberystwyth University, said: “To go from a group of rich Ashkenazi Jews using their money to foster Islamophobic sentiment to raising the spectre of Zionist financiers working in concert, tracks with long-standing antisemitic tropes.
“Any such claims should be subjected to detailed empirical evidence and diligent academic scrutiny.”
A spokesperson for the Royal Geographical Society said: “In common with all pieces published in the Society’s academic journals, the views in the commentary are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Society.
“All our journals operate within the framework of academic freedom. As such we welcome responses to all content published in our journals, and one response to this commentary has been accepted and will soon be published online.
“As a result of the concerns raised in this response, we have requested a correction from the author of the original piece to address a factual error in the text.”
To get more news, click here to sign up for our free daily newsletter.