Prior to the UK general elections, a media investigation revealed that five of the six major British political parties had taken illicit foreign funds. To minimise excessive foreign influence, British legislation compels parties to refund unlawful donations within 30 days and disclose any failures to the Electoral Commission. Only people on the electoral roll can make donations, with a minimum limit of £500.
However, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism discovered that the Conservative Party, Reform UK, Liberal Democrats, Green Party, and Scottish National Party failed to prevent or identify these donations, which were made through an assortment of modest payments totalling more than £500 from a foreign source. As per the report, only the Labour Party successfully blocked such unlawful donations. Election law expert Gavin Millar criticised the self-policing method as ineffective and illogical because it relies on beneficiaries to enforce the law.
Concerns had grown in the run-up to the 2024 UK general election about foreign players funding political non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Despite precise laws deliberate to prevent excessive foreign influence, some NGOs with significant influence in UK politics have evidently received large amounts of funding from international sources. These contributions, which are frequently routed through intricate channels to avoid detection, undermine the integrity of the democratic process and threaten to influence election results in favour of foreign interests. The current legal system, which relies mainly on self-policing, is deeply inadequate, allowing foreign funders to have hidden power over British politics.
Several controversial groups in the British community receive funding from ambiguous sources, which they utilise to spread their propaganda and operations throughout the country. One prominent example is the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), an umbrella group that represents over 500 interconnected mosques and Muslim organisations. MCB has a notorious history of sponsoring and supporting extremist actions, prompting consecutive British administrations to adopt a “non-engagement” stance with the organisation since 2009. Notably, the MCB backed a declaration in Istanbul calling for jihad in reaction to Israel’s activities in Gaza and backing Hamas attacks on foreign forces, possibly involving British troops.
Another outfit of concern is the Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is secretively operational in the UK despite being banned in many countries due to its disruptive ideology and links to terrorist acts. Hizb ut-Tahrir has been accused of radicalising young Muslims and pushing for the formation of a global caliphate through non-democratic means. Its financing roots are opaque, leading to suspicions of foreign financial aid intended to destabilise communities. Islamic Relief Worldwide, headquartered in the United Kingdom, has been accused of supporting terrorist entities, especially Hamas. The organisation denies these allegations. However, both Israel and the United Arab Emirates have blacklisted Islamic Relief Worldwide over concerns about the misuse of charitable donations to fund terrorist activities.
Furthermore, CAGE, a UK-based advocacy group, has made headlines for its provocative viewpoints and possible ties to terrorists. The entity openly advocated for prominent figures such as Dr Aafia Siddiqui, who is serving an 86-year jail term for the attempted murder of an FBI agent under disputed circumstances. She is an al-Qaeda sympathiser. They also advocated for Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born cleric of Yemeni descent, who was a key figure in al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). While CAGE claims to advocate for human rights, its support of high-profile individuals linked to terrorism and its receipt of foreign financing have sparked investigations and criticism from numerous sources, including the British government.
The Islamic community in the United Kingdom has considerable influence on the political mandate because of its large population and active involvement in societal and political matters. British Muslims contribute to the electorate’s diversity of approaches, influencing policy discussions on immigration, foreign policy, and community welfare. The community’s participation in voting and political discourse ensures that the problems and demands of a sizeable portion of the population are addressed. This impact, however, can be undermined by organisations and people who mislead or manipulate the community to further their own agendas.
Extremist organisations in the UK have not only attacked non-Islamic communities, as evidenced by the attacks on Hindus in Leicester, but also actively sought to influence political circumstances ahead of the recent general elections. These organisations mobilise Muslim voters and lobby for certain political positions, such as supporting Palestinians and calling for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict. According to studies, these organisations use societal tensions and global conflicts to acquire influence, which frequently results in heightened division and violence. The pervasive influence of these extremist groups underscores the critical need for tougher measures to counter their activities and safeguard the democratic process from being hijacked by radical ideology.
In 2017, the Henry Jackson Society highlighted the significant role of foreign funding in the spread of Islamist extremism in Britain. The Society noted that this funding, primarily from government-linked foundations in the Gulf and Iran, has supported the dissemination of extremist ideologies, particularly citing Saudi Arabia’s multimillion-dollar initiatives since the 1960s to promote Wahhabism. In the United Kingdom, these funds have often taken the form of endowments for mosques and Islamic educational institutions, some of which have hosted extremist preachers or distributed radical material. British Muslim religious leaders trained in Saudi Arabia, along with the use of Saudi textbooks in some British Islamic schools, further contribute to this trend. Notably, many of Britain’s most infamous Islamist hate preachers have ties to foreign funding, a factor that has contributed to the radicalisation of individuals who have gone on to join jihadist groups in Iraq and Syria.
Foreign funds pose a serious threat to the UK’s democratic values, as proven by recent exposes of illegal donations to major political parties and the influence of extremist organisations. Despite rules aimed at preventing undue foreign influence, the inability of a structured legal framework to ban illegal donations highlights the shortcomings of the current self-policing system. Furthermore, foreign funding by political NGOs and extremist groups undermines the legitimacy of the democratic process. These organisations use societal tensions and global crises to advance their objectives by propagating extreme beliefs and disrupting communities.
The author is a doctoral fellow at Amity University in Gwalior, content manager at Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.