[6] The University of Oxford had previously sent a message of "profound sympathy for those suffering in Gaza, Israel, and the West Bank".

[4] Other demands included the disclosure of university assets, divestment from Barclays bank,[7] and financial contribution to the rebuilding of Palestine.

[13][14][15] One demonstrator said they were inspired by the Rhodes Must Fall and FeesMustFall campaigns in South Africa and Oxford as well as anti-war movement history.

[19] On 5 June, an activist counted 23 college Junior and Middle Common Rooms (JCRs and MCRs) that had passed motions supporting the encampments' demands.

[20] The university initially said that "peaceful protests" by staff and students were part of "freedom of expression", but that it aimed to minimise "impact on work, research and learning".

With no hierarchical leadership and decisions made democratically, individuals volunteered for logistical tasks such as an overnight guard rota.

According to OA4P and a freelance journalist at the scene, six men arrived by taxi and threatened violence, shouting hate speech, ripping down banners and targeting Jewish students with antisemitic language.

[3] Sharren Haskel visited to criticise the encampment;[24] on another occasion, according to Tribune, Zionist Jews came to debate the protesters.

[25] Shlaim spoke positively of the encampment to Yeni Şafak, rejecting Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's claims that antisemitism on university campuses had risen and asserting that Islamophobia was a larger issue in Britain.

[26] Middle East Monitor reported that Friday prayers were held on the first week and that Jewish students were among protesters.

[8] Hundreds of protesters gathered at the scene for three hours, some of whom attempted to block the police van that carried the arrested students.

[20] A statement by protesters said the university "would rather arrest, silence, and physically assault its own students than confront its enabling of Israel's genocide in Gaza".

[34] After the arrests, the university stated that "a faction of students and faculty ... have not been interested in dialogue in good faith" and that the protest was a "violent action" that "included forcibly overpowering the receptionist".