Suella Braverman has been forced to clarify that she had been referring to dissident republicans in an article in which she likened the pro-Palestine protests in London to sectarian marches in Northern Ireland. In an article for the Times, the home secretary described the recent protests in central London as an “assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland”. Her comments were in response to the announcement by the Met police commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, that he did not have grounds to ban a march due to take place on Armistice Day. The comparison to sectarian displays of identity in Northern Ireland caused confusion, however, as it is the unionist and loyalist community that is better known for marching. A marching season between Easter Monday and the end of September in Northern Ireland is known for the processions by a range of unionist groups, including the Apprentice Boys of Derry and the Orange Order. Former Northern Ireland secretary Peter Hain said he had presumed the remarks were an attack on Orange Order marches. He said: “Why on earth is this gratuitously offensive Home Secretary meddling in Northern Ireland affairs with her ignorant attack on Orange Order marches by traditional unionists?” The BBC reported on Thursday morning that “a source close to the home secretary” had said Braverman was referring to the activities of “dissident republicans”. The comments have drawn angry criticism from politicians in Northern Ireland. Colum Eastwood, the MP for Foyle and leader of the SDLP, the nationalist party whose founding member, John Hume, won a Nobel prize for his championing of the peace process in Northern Ireland, called Braverman a “pound-shop Enoch Powell”. “The comments comparing the proposed Armistice Day protests against the appalling bombardment of civilians in Gaza with the marching tradition in Northern Ireland are an exercise in what can only be described as aggressive ignorance,” he said. “Ignorance of the conditions faced by the civilian population in Gaza, ignorance of the role of the Met police, ignorance of the complex history and traditions of marching and protest in Northern Ireland. She has managed to offend just about everyone – no mean feat in a divided society. “The comments are far below the standard that should be expected from a senior government minister. The only appropriate action now is her removal from office but given the systemic weakness of this government, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she remained.” Stephen Farry, an MP for the Alliance party, which originally represented moderate and non-sectarian unionism but which now takes a neutral approach to the union, said the “comparisons to Northern Ireland are pathetic”, describing Braverman’s comments as the latest “of a series of cruel comments and oppressive policies”. Sinn Féin’s foreign affairs spokesperson, Matt Carthy, claimed the home secretary had “as much knowledge about the situation in Northern Ireland as she seems to have about the situation in Palestine at the moment”. He told the BBC’s Good Morning Ulster programme: “The British government has taken a disappointing stance in my view in respect of the ongoing conflict in Gaza. “I would argue if British ministers are in the frame of mind where they want to talk about Ireland and the north, the frame of mind they should be in is ensuring the DUP return to Stormont and we get the executive up and running.” David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, said the home secretary seemed to be “seeking to exploit the sensitivities of this moment, and an ignorance of Northern Ireland’s history, to inflame community tensions for her own leadership campaign”. However, the DUP MP Ian Paisley defended Braverman’s broader criticism of the police in the article. He told the Commons: “When women were treated brutally and unjustly by the Metropolitan police in this city in the wake of the Sarah Everard murder, this house – inside and out – members came out to criticise the police, correctly, for their failure and their brutality … The hand-wringing hypocrisy and the pant-wetting that we are seeing over someone criticising the police correctly is amazing.”