Michael Gove has urged pro-Palestinian protesters to question whether extremist groups are behind some of the demonstrations – days ahead of publishing a new official definition of extremism.
The housing secretary said “good-hearted people” attending the marches should be aware they could be “lending credence” to extremists.
Tens of thousands of people participated in a Gaza protest organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) on Saturday in London – the fifth march in the capital this year – which saw five arrests and a counter-demonstrator de-arrested.
While marching through central London, protesters chanted “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and waved banners demanding a “ceasefire now”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:42
Charlotte Church joins pro-Palestine march
Mr Gove condemned the chant saying it called for the “erasure” of Israel and could fuel hate, in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph.
He said the upcoming revised definition of extremist groups would help protesters decide whether to attend future pro-Palestine events.
In the interview, he said: “If we’re clear about the nature of extremist organisations, then I think that means that some of the people – and there are good-hearted people who go on these marches, I don’t agree with them, but they’re moved by suffering and they want peace – but it may help some of them to question who are organising some of these events.”
More on Gaza
Related Topics:
The minister said some of the events had been “organised by extremist organisations” but would not elaborate just yet.
He continued: “That doesn’t mean that people who have gone on them are extremist, quite the opposite.
Advertisement
“But it means that you can begin to question: do you really want to be lending credence to this organisation? If you do, fair enough. But now there is no excuse for ignorance.”
The controversial chant of “from the river to the sea” – a reference to a Palestinian state stretching from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean – has drawn anger from some pro-Israel supporters, who argue the phrase calls for the eradication of the Israeli state.
Some pro-Palestinian supporters reject this, saying it is simply expressing the need for equality for all inhabitants of historic Palestine.
Image: Michael Gove. Pic: PA
Mr Gove said: “We can also have a broader conversation about the way in which some of what’s said on these marches springs from an extremist ideology, rather than simply being an expression of passionate opposition to conflict.
“‘From the river to the sea’ is not a call for peace… when you’re saying ‘from the river to the sea’, you’re explicitly saying: ‘I want to see the end of Israel as a Jewish state, the Jewish homeland erased’.
“Be clear about the fact that you know a key Islamist demand is the erasure of what they see as the ‘Zionist entity’ or the ‘crusader Zionist state’.
“And therefore, let’s be clear that there is a difference between a cry for peace and the legitimisation of an extremist position which intimidates and leads to hate.”
The existing definition of extremism features in the government’s Prevent counter-radicalisation programme, which aims to stop vulnerable people from being drawn into extremism.
It’s defined as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs”.
The new definition will receive “more specificity”, and will enable the government and other public bodies to ban funding and engagement with Islamist and far-right groups.
Groups including the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), and Palestine Action – the organisation behind the recent defacing of Lord Balfour’s portrait at the University of Cambridge – could reportedly fall under the new extremist definition.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:22
Balfour painting slashed in Gaza protest
In a pre-emptive statement, Zara Mohammed of the MCB said suggesting the group would be identified “under arbitrary definitions of extremism is offensive, ludicrous and dangerous”.
“Tackling extremism is a serious issue that requires serious leadership from us all. Weaponising extremism for divisive electoral gain is dangerous and we must all see through it,” she added.
Mr Gove sought to address fears from some Conservatives that the new definition could encompass gender-critical feminists or devout religious groups.
“It’s only extremism if you translate that into a political ideology that is anti-democratic,” he said.
“Private belief should be cherished. Free speech has to be protected.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Mr Gove hinted that foreign governments such as Iran could be behind some of the extremist groups operating in the UK.
“One of the things that we’re explicitly looking at is the way in which foreign state and non-state actors seek to encourage extremism here,” he said.
“And again, this is inevitably sensitive work about which I can say only a very limited amount because it’s not only Iran that attempts to use some of these forces to destabilise British democracy.”
Meanwhile, The Observer reports there are fears within the government that the new definition could face a legal challenge.
“The government wants to launch this without a public consultation on the definition, or proper engagement with faith leaders,” one official, who claims to have seen the proposals, told the newspaper.
There is “no doubt” the UK “will spend 3% of our GDP on defence” in the next parliament, the defence secretary has said.
John Healey’s comments come ahead of the publication of the government’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) on Monday.
This is an assessment of the state of the armed forces, the threats facing the UK, and the military transformation required to meet them.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously set out a “clear ambition” to raise defence spending to 3% in the next parliament “subject to economic and fiscal conditions”.
Mr Healey has now told The Times newspaper there is a “certain decade of rising defence spending” to come, adding that this commitment “allows us to plan for the long term. It allows us to deal with the pressures.”
A government source insisted the defence secretary was “expressing an opinion, which is that he has full confidence that the government will be able to deliver on its ambition”, rather than making a new commitment.
The UK currently spends 2.3% of GDP on defence, with Sir Keir announcing plans to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 in February.
More on John Healey
Related Topics:
This followed mounting pressure from the White House for European nations to do more to take on responsibility for their own security and the defence of Ukraine.
The 2.3% to 2.5% increase is being paid for by controversial cuts to the international aid budget, but there are big questions over where the funding for a 3% rise would be found, given the tight state of government finances.
While a commitment will help underpin the planning assumptions made in the SDR, there is of course no guarantee a Labour government would still be in power during the next parliament to have to fulfil that pledge.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:21
From March: How will the UK scale up defence?
A statement from the Ministry of Defence makes it clear that the official government position has not changed in line with the defence secretary’s comments.
The statement reads: “This government has announced the largest sustained increase to defence spending since the end of the Cold War – 2.5% by 2027 and 3% in the next parliament when fiscal and economic conditions allow, including an extra £5bn this financial year.
“The SDR will rightly set the vision for how that uplift will be spent, including new capabilities to put us at the leading edge of innovation in NATO, investment in our people and making defence an engine for growth across the UK – making Britain more secure at home and strong abroad.”
Sir Keir commissioned the review shortly after taking office in July 2024. It is being led by Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary and NATO secretary general.
The Ministry of Defence has already trailed a number of announcements as part of the review, including plans for a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command and a £1bn battlefield system known as the Digital Targeting Web, which we’re told will “better connect armed forces weapons systems and allow battlefield decisions for targeting enemy threats to be made and executed faster”.
Image: PM Sir Keir Starmer and Defence Secretary John Healey on a nuclear submarine earlier this year. Pic: Crown Copyright 2025
On Saturday, the defence secretary announced a £1.5bn investment to tackle damp, mould and make other improvements to poor quality military housing in a bid to improve recruitment and retention.
Mr Healey pledged to “turn round what has been a national scandal for decades”, with 8,000 military family homes currently unfit for habitation.
He said: “The Strategic Defence Review, in the broad, will recognise that the fact that the world is changing, threats are increasing.
“In this new era of threat, we need a new era for defence and so the Strategic Defence Review will be the vision and direction for the way that we’ve got to strengthen our armed forces to make us more secure at home, stronger abroad, but also learn the lessons from Ukraine as well.
“So an armed forces that can be more capable of innovation more quickly, stronger to deter the threats that we face and always with people at the heart of our forces… which is why the housing commitments that we make through this strategic defence review are so important for the future.”