Manchester synagogue attack raises fraught questions about security, policing and public protest
On a day reserved for introspection and prayer, a Jewish community in north Manchester was thrust into trauma. A car and knife attack outside the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation synagogue in Crumpsall on Thursday left three men hospitalised and two dead — the alleged attacker and a passer-by who tried to intervene — and has prompted a national debate over community safety, the limits of protest and how police respond in rapidly unfolding terror incidents.
- Advertisement -
Fast-moving investigation, wider reverberations
Counter Terrorism Policing North West (CTPNW) has taken the lead in an inquiry that has moved quickly. On Saturday authorities secured warrants allowing four people to be held for an additional five days; two other suspects remain in custody. Among the six are men aged 30 and 32 and women aged 46 and 61 arrested in the Greater Manchester area.
Police say the suspected attacker, identified in reporting as 35-year-old Jihad Al-Shamie, was shot dead on the spot as he targeted worshippers arriving for Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. A 53-year-old man, Adrian Daulby, is believed to have been fatally shot by police as he tried to stop the attacker entering the synagogue.
Authorities also confirmed a “suspicious device” on the attacker’s body was fake, and that police believe he “may have been influenced by extreme Islamist ideology.” The force said he had a criminal history unrelated to counter‑terrorism and had been on bail for an alleged rape.
A police watchdog is examining the use of lethal force by Greater Manchester Police firearms officers, including whether their actions may have “caused or contributed to the death” of Mr Daulby. For many in the community, the questions are immediate: who was responsible for the wider planning of the attack, and did public agencies do enough to protect worshippers on one of the most sacred days in the Jewish calendar?
Leaders and communities respond — and clash
Political leaders visited the scene amid a tense national debate. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who visited on Friday, urged people planning to protest in Manchester and London to “respect the grief of British Jews” and warned demonstrations could deepen the pain of mourners. “This is a moment of mourning. It is not a time to stoke tension and cause further pain,” he wrote in the Jewish Chronicle and Jewish News.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, standing alongside Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and Assistant Chief Constable John Webster at the synagogue on Saturday, struck a different chord, saying Jewish people were telling her “they are leaving to go to Israel” and calling for greater security. “We need to bring back safety to our streets,” she said.
Overseas, Israel’s foreign minister, Gideon Sa’ar, urged the UK government to “fight the pro-Palestinian marches and protests.” Back in Britain, organisers of a planned central London protest insisted it would go ahead, arguing that “cancelling peaceful protests lets terror win.”
The tensions are symptomatic of a wider problem: how to balance the right to demonstrate — a bedrock of liberal democracies — with the need to protect vulnerable communities grieving a violent assault. The arrest warrants and increased patrols announced by Greater Manchester Police aim to reassure, but many Jewish community members say reassurance must be matched by action.
Between grief and anger: a community’s brittle fault lines
Local Jewish groups and national charities such as the Community Security Trust have documented a sharp rise in antisemitic incidents since the conflict in the Middle East escalated in October. Dave Rich, director of policy at the CST, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that incitement has been “off the charts” in mosque sermons since Oct. 7, and warned of “an inability to recognise antisemitism” across parts of civil society.
“I think the anger is directed there and I think a lot of Jewish people will be saying ‘OK, the sympathy is great, but where’s the action?'” Rich said — words that capture a frustration echoed in communities from London to Manchester and beyond.
For worshippers at Heaton Park, Yom Kippur — a day of fasting, repentance and communal introspection — will now be indelibly marked by images of police cordons and hospital wards. At Old Trafford on Saturday, Manchester United observed a minute’s silence and players were expected to wear black armbands, a small public gesture amid a storm of political argument and media attention.
Broader trends: radicalisation, policing and the politics of protection
There are several threads here that sit beyond a single act of violence. The alleged attacker’s history — described by police as non-counter-terrorist but including a recent rape arrest while on bail — prompts difficult questions about how criminal justice systems interact with broader public safety objectives. The appearance of a fake explosive device highlights how modern attackers may seek to magnify terror through spectacle, knowing the psychological effect of a bomb is as potent as a real one.
Another thread is the role of protests and their optics. Across Europe and North America the Israel-Hamas war has sharpened communal divisions, with demonstrations frequently spilling into accusations of antisemitism, Islamophobia and heavy-handed policing. Governments are under pressure to protect free expression while ensuring the physical safety of often-targeted minorities.
There is also an information dimension. Rapid online radicalisation, algorithm-driven echo chambers and the velocity of disinformation make it harder to detect a lone actor until they strike. Counter-terror agencies are stretched thin across a range of threats, from Islamist-inspired violence to far-right terror, and resources — and public confidence in them — are finite.
What now? Questions that refuse easy answers
The Manchester attack forces uncomfortable questions. How will the UK protect religious minorities during moments of global crisis? How should police balance rapid life-or-death decisions with accountability when their lethal force is later scrutinised? And how can societies preserve the civic right to protest without allowing demonstrations to become cover for intimidation or hate?
Answers will need to combine immediate security measures with longer-term investment in community relations, hate-crime prevention, and the digital infrastructure that can both amplify and mitigate radicalising messages. As Manchester’s Jewish community mourns and seeks assurance, policy makers must also confront the deeper fractures that leave communities feeling exposed and overlooked.
In the meantime, investigators are pursuing leads, hospitals are treating the wounded, and a neighbourhood that gathers yearly in quiet repentance now grapples with a more public, noisier sorrow. The world is watching — and wondering whether this moment will prompt systemic change or simply another round of familiar, unresolved arguments.
By Abdiwahab Ahmed
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
