How Are Drugs and Gangs Used to Fearmonger Citizens Into Siding With Anti-Migrant Rhetoric?

I’m Tegan, a third-year Marine and Freshwater Biology student at Aberystwyth University and a member of Solidaritee Aberystwyth. I have only recently started volunteering with SolidariTee, but I have loved meeting people who share the same passion to make a real impact.

This piece explores how the politicisation of fear with the 'drugs and gangs' narrative is used to push harmful and hostile rhetoric towards migrants and refugees.

---

Fear is one of the most powerful drivers of anti-migration rhetoric. Across political speeches, news headlines, protests and, perhaps most influentially, social media, migrants are being increasingly portrayed as threats. One of the most harmful angles used to whip up fear and hostility towards migrants is the repeated associations made between people on the move and drugs, gangs and violent crimes. These narratives are strategically pushed in the media and by a number of political figures, spiking fear that aims to move the public towards harsher, anti-migrant policies.

The Media, Protests and Slogans.

It is undeniable that the media plays a significant role in distorting narratives and pushing agendas from right-wing political leaders around migration. The choice of language, images and headlines can drastically shape audiences' interpretations of migration.

Amongst those who are most vocal about expressing anti-migrant sentiments within the UK, fear-mongering rhetoric that uses harmful associations about criminality has seemingly come to mean that migrants pose a danger to the safety of ordinary people’s lives. Within the most extreme of these groups, ‘Protect our kids’ is a phrase that appears again and again; it is shouted at protests and displayed on signs, which are relentlessly published across social media within certain circles. One particular Facebook group named ‘Save Our Women and Children’ has attracted 653 supporters by promoting slogans such as ‘Stop the Boats’ and ‘Enough is Enough’. Despite the simplicity of these statements, they carry significant emotional power, promoting anger and anxiety and framing migrants as direct threats.

Anti-migrant protests play a powerful role in gaining media attention and spreading hateful messages. Last summer in Epping (Essex), an estimated 400 anti-migration protestors gathered outside a hotel housing migrants, according to a BBC News report (Chaudhari, 2025). One particular protester explained that she attended the protest to “protect my grandkids,” adding that “everyone wants the same, (which is to) save our children.” These narratives have been multiplied across protesters’ signs, for example, between the 30th July and the 7th August 2024, when in just over a week, 29 anti-immigration riots took place in 27 UK cities and towns. And again in September 2025, when a far-right and anti-immigration protest in London drew between 110,000 and 150,000 people (Al Jazeera, 2025). By framing discrimination as protection, protestors can present their actions as morally justified when, in reality, they are simply targeting some of the most vulnerable members of our society.

When fear-based opinions are repeated enough, they begin to replace the facts, creating a distorted picture of who migrants are and why they come to the UK.

The Facts.

At SolidariTee, we know that there is nothing in relation to upholding the right to asylum, and to providing safety for people forced to flee persecution and violence, that the UK needs ‘saving from’. However, public opinion reveals how deeply misinformation has taken hold. Previous research has found that 47% of people believe there are more illegal migrants than legal (YouGov, 2025). Significant attention surrounding small-boat crossings, which continue to be framed as ‘illegal’ by the UK government, despite the United Nations Refugee Convention prohibiting asylum seekers from being penalised for irregular routes of travel to seek safety, contributes to the perception that migration to the UK is largely illegal. In reality, small boat crossings accounted for just 5% of all national migration in the year ending June 2025 (Safe Passage, 2025).

Since 2018, nearly one in six of those arriving by small boat have been children, more than half travelling alone (Safe Passage, 2025). The anti-migration groups who claim to be acting to ‘save the children’ consistently overlook the lived realities of displaced children forced into dangerous journeys by war, persecution and the closure of safe routes.

The majority of migration into the UK is through work, study or family visa. Data also confirms that of the 179,000 asylum applications made by people who crossed by small boat, 2018-2025, almost two-thirds (63%) were then granted the status and protection of a 'refugee' (Gov.UK, 2025): a person who has been forced to leave their country to escape war or persecution (as defined by the international 1951 Refugee Convention). Eritreans were the largest nationality crossing the Channel by small boat in 2025, alongside Afghan, Iranian, Sudanese and Somali nationals, many of whom face serious harm if returned (UK Parliament, 2025). Under international refugee law, seeking asylum is not illegal, yet the UK seeks to criminalise seeking safety by closing family reunification routes and restricting the number of people who can apply for protection (Gov.UK, 2025).

At the same time, the number of individuals arriving through the UK government's so-called ‘safe and legal (humanitarian) routes’, typically reserved for the Ukraine scheme visa and a limited number of other routes for people with family in the UK or who are already recognised as refugees in another country, has fallen sharply. In fact, 33% fewer humanitarian visas were granted in 2025 than in 2024 (Gov.UK, 2025). Family reunification routes have also recently been suspended. Policies put in place to tackle migration really don’t demonstrate a true commitment to providing alternative routes for those fleeing persecution. In other words, people are crossing the Channel because they have no choice.

In any case, even if none of this was true, there is simply no evidence that people reaching the UK via irregular routes, such as small boat crossings, have a detrimental effect on public safety. 

Fear Comes From the Top.

The media plays a strong role in promoting these hateful narratives, but often this hostility begins at a state level. Politicians and governments use drugs and gangs as a rhetorical tool to frame migration as a security threat rather than a humanitarian issue. When people in power repeatedly link migration and refugees to crime, they legitimise fear and provide the foundation that is later echoed and expanded upon by the media and anti-migration groups. Research has found a link between the government’s anti-migrant rhetoric and far-right activity; for example, messages about migration increased on Telegram by 72% when Boris Johnson announced 50 asylum seekers would be sent back to Rwanda (Hope not Hate, 2023).

Since 2022, policies put in place by Labour and Conservative governments have had a strong focus on criminalising asylum seekers and expanding custodial sentences, which disproportionately affect those who want to seek asylum in the UK. The Conservatives’ Nationality and Borders Act 2022 made irregular entry a criminal offence punishable by prison, while the Illegal Migration Act 2023 went further by restricting access to asylum altogether for those arriving via small boats. Labour’s approach with the policy paper Restoring Order and Control 2025 continues to emphasise border security, enforcement powers and new criminal offences. The constant association between asylum seekers and criminals reinforces negative ideas of migrants.

Successive policy attempts framed as ‘smashing the gangs’ have failed to address the root cause: that as long as people seeking safety via irregular routes are targeted and criminalised within migration policies, smugglers will only become more embedded in global migration routes. Despite this, political responses prioritise tough slogans over effective solutions and policies, such as Keir Starmer’s pledge to “smash the gangs”, which echoes his predecessors, Rishi Sunak’s failed promise to “stop the boats”, reflecting a reliance on strong political messaging rather than addressing the causes of irregular migration (The Guardian, 2025).

Across Europe, campaigners have argued that restrictive migration policies are driving people towards these smuggling networks, “If policymakers don’t address why people turn to smugglers, they end up strengthening the very networks they’re trying to stop,” stated one campaigner (The Guardian, 2025). Further research by Border Criminology and the Centre for Criminology at the University of Oxford has shown that hundreds of people imprisoned for migration are refugees, survivors of trafficking and even children, which is in breach of international law (The Guardian, 2025). These crackdowns do not deter migration; instead, they push people towards more dangerous routes. Addressing exploitation, therefore, requires expanding safe pathways and international cooperation, rather than criminalising those seeking safety.

Meanwhile, the rise of Reform UK has intensified political pressure to adopt tougher policies on migration, contributing to a widespread agreement that frames asylum through punishment and security risks rather than protection.

Parallels across the Atlantic

This framing of migration as a security threat is not confined to the UK. The US President, Donald Trump, has been using ‘The War on Drugs’ to justify a military buildup and strikes on boats during his escalating confrontation with Venezuela. Trump has repeatedly framed Venezuela as not only a security threat but also accused Venezuela of sending gangs, drugs and dealers into the US to justify his attacks. In remarks to the press, Trump added, “Look, Venezuela is sending us their gang members, their drug dealers and drugs. It's not acceptable” (Al Jazeera, 2025). Trump’s language portrays migration as dangerous, legitimising his aggressive military and immigration enforcement (The Guardian, 2026). During recent escalations, however, Trump has completely shifted his narratives, claiming that Venezuela had ‘stolen’ oil from the US and that it would now be taken back. These claims have been disputed by various analysts, who argue that the US has no legal claim to Venezuelan oil (The Guardian, 2026). Trump’s depiction of Venezuela mirrors a familiar strategy: emphasising danger and criminality and using fear to justify violence.

The US has taken dramatic actions to carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in US history, whilst also promoting fear and public outreach to support these harsh anti-migrant policies. While Trump's policies claim to focus on deporting the “Worst of the worst”, this falls short. Between January and August in 2025, The Guardian analysed data from 140,00 I-213 forms, the Department of Homeland Security’s records of someone’s ‘illegality’, frequently used in deportation processes. They found that approximately 77% of people going through deportation proceedings had no criminal convictions, revealing a stark gap between Trump’s rhetoric and reality (The Guardian, 2026). Whether or not a person has a criminal record, dragging people off the streets based on racial profiling and pure suspicion is and never has been morally justified.

By amplifying these fears around drugs and gangs, Trump has been able to justify expansive deportation efforts and militarised enforcement, encouraging public support for policies that disproportionately target non-criminal migrants.

Conclusion

In a world where fear is increasingly used as a political tool, it is more important than ever to challenge these narratives linking refugees and migrations to crime, through real evidence. If the goal is to protect lives and uphold human rights, we must move beyond hateful slogans and invest in expanding safe and legal pathways, international cooperations and policies that recognise the dignity of these people. Only then can we confront the realities of displacement with compassion, clarity and justice.