**Invesco Hit by Protest as Palestine Action Targets Another Financial Institution**
In a renewed wave of activism targeting the UK’s financial sector, the Westminster offices of Invesco, a global investment powerhouse, were vandalised by campaigners from the Palestine Action group on Monday. The group, known for its distinctive approach to protest, covered the building in red paint and left graffiti on its exterior at Portman Square, central London.
This incident marks the latest in a string of direct actions aimed at pressuring financial institutions over their links to Israeli defence companies. Palestine Action has openly claimed responsibility for the attack, stating that the action was intended to urge the firm to sever ties with Elbit Systems, an Israeli military technology supplier. According to the activists, their objective is to force financial giants to reconsider their investments that, in their view, enable or legitimise alleged human rights violations.
As of writing, both Invesco and the Metropolitan Police have been contacted for their official statements regarding the episode, but no responses have yet been received. The company, which is headquartered in the United States and manages billions in assets worldwide, now finds itself at the centre of a debate on ethical investment and protest tactics.
This event follows closely on the heels of similar activities involving other major financial institutions. Notably, last month saw JP Morgan—one of the world’s largest banks, and reportedly holding significant shares in Elbit Systems—subjected to a comparable act of vandalism at its London branches. The recurrence of such incidents suggests that this is becoming an established tactic among protest groups aiming to provoke change at a corporate level.
Notably, Barclays has been another frequent target, with a succession of vandalism cases linked to the same issue over the past year. The bank has commented previously on what it describes as “intimidating tactics” used against both its premises and employees, attributing such measures to ongoing campaigns critical of its involvement with defence companies.
Security and operational impacts aside, the increasing tempo of direct action has begun to attract greater political attention. In recent days, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper spoke out in response to footage of Palestine Action members vandalising Royal Air Force equipment. In a sharp rebuke, she labelled the actions as “disgraceful,” pointing to a broader pattern of “unacceptable criminal damage” linked to the activist network.
In response to what the government perceives as an escalation in both frequency and severity of these protests, Cooper announced her intention to seek Parliamentary approval for new legislation. The proposed measures would designate Palestine Action as a proscribed terrorist organisation—a significant legal step intended to render group membership or encouragement of support a criminal offence.
If enacted, individuals falling foul of the new law could face penalties up to 14 years in prison, although it is anticipated that many cases will result in fines rather than hefty jail terms. The move underscores growing concern within government about the boundaries between legitimate protest and criminal activity, especially when property damage or the intimidation of workers becomes involved.
This sequence of events highlights the complex interplay between activism, corporate responsibility, and public debate over Britain’s financial links to contentious international industries. As calls grow for investment transparency and ethical decision-making at the highest levels, it is evident that both campaigners and institutions are bracing for further confrontations as the issue remains in the spotlight.