[[{“value”:”
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
Public order policing is becoming more volatile across the United States and Canada. Demonstrations can now be shaped within minutes by rapid mobilization, online amplification and crowd dynamics that are difficult to predict. A gathering that begins peacefully can shift quickly, leaving police leaders to make high-stakes decisions under intense scrutiny.
Public order incidents now require more than tactical readiness. They require command clarity, disciplined communication and leadership that holds steady under pressure.
I recently returned from Belfast, Northern Ireland, where I joined a delegation invited by senior leaders from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI). The group included public safety drone specialists from Draganfly, and the visit focused on public order policing, dialogue-based de-escalation, command decision-making and the role of drone technology in fast-moving public order incidents.
By the end of the first day, those conversations were no longer theoretical.
Belfast was experiencing significant public disorder after riots broke out on June 9, 2026, following a stabbing attack allegedly committed by a Sudanese immigrant the previous evening. Anti-immigration violence spread across multiple areas of the city, with homes, businesses and vehicles set alight, police targeted and simultaneous incidents requiring a coordinated response.
Inside PSNI headquarters, senior leaders tracked developments in real time through a structured command system. On the ground, officers moved into rapidly changing situations with discipline, coordination and the composure that comes from years of operating in difficult public order environments.
What stayed with me was not just the disorder. It was the response.
A command system built for complexity
The first lesson was the value of command clarity.
Northern Ireland’s Gold-Silver-Bronze command model has long been regarded as one of the most effective public order command frameworks in democratic policing. Many North American agencies are familiar with the concept, but seeing it operate during a live public order incident made clear why it has endured.
The model separates command responsibilities into three levels:
- Gold Command sets the strategic direction. Gold commanders focus on public safety priorities, community impact, political considerations and long-term outcomes. Their role is to establish intent without getting pulled into tactical decisions.
- Silver Command connects strategy to operations. Silver commanders translate strategic objectives into tactical plans, coordinate resources, manage competing priorities and keep the various operational elements aligned with the overall mission.
- Bronze Command operates on the ground. These commanders are responsible for execution, making real-time decisions as conditions change while staying aligned with the strategic intent established above them.
The strength of the model lies in the discipline behind it. Each level understands its role and stays within it. Gold does not micromanage Bronze, and Bronze does not lose sight of strategic intent. Silver keeps the system aligned.
In fast-moving incidents, this clarity affects both the speed and quality of decision-making. Decisions can move more quickly because authority is understood. Information can flow more efficiently because reporting relationships are established before the crisis begins. Even as incidents developed simultaneously across multiple locations in Belfast, commanders remained focused on their responsibilities without creating confusion or duplication.
For police leaders in the United States and Canada, that lesson is especially relevant.
This should not be read as a critique of the Incident Command System or the public order methods already used across North America. ICS remains a proven command framework for emergency management and law enforcement, with clear value in critical incidents, natural disasters and large-scale events.
Rather than replacing existing frameworks, the model offers ideas that can strengthen them.
The disciplined separation of strategic, tactical and operational responsibilities in the Gold-Silver-Bronze model can strengthen command clarity, improve information flow and support decision-making within existing North American command structures.
As public order incidents become more dynamic, command systems must do more than assign roles. They must create clarity under pressure. That is what I saw in Belfast.
Dialogue policing in practice
One of the strongest elements of the PSNI response was the use of dialogue policing as a frontline operational tool.
Before situations escalated, trained officers engaged directly with crowds through structured communication intended to reduce tension and create opportunities for de-escalation. This was not casual conversation or informal outreach. It was part of the operational strategy.
Dialogue officers were also connected to the broader command structure. They gave commanders insight into crowd sentiment, emerging tensions and moments when confrontation might still be avoided. In Belfast, dialogue was treated as a tool of influence, not a public relations function.
In today’s public order environment, the ability to influence crowd behavior before confrontation occurs can help determine whether an incident stabilizes or escalates.
This approach is gaining attention in the United States through work such as Dr. Cliff Stott’s Portland Framework for Dialogue Policing, which emphasizes legitimacy, communication, procedural justice and a better understanding of crowd dynamics.
When dialogue policing is built into operations, it can improve situational awareness, strengthen command decisions, support proportional deployment of resources and reduce unnecessary escalation.
In Belfast, dialogue officers were not operating on the margins of the response. They were part of it.
| LISTEN: Portland Assistant Chief Craig Dobson and Professor Clifford Stott, a social psychologist from Keele University in the United Kingdom, explore how crowd science and dialogue-based policing are helping shape a safer, more democratic approach to managing public order events.
Restraint as a tactical strength
Another defining characteristic of the PSNI response was restraint.
The decisions I observed were measured. Timing mattered. Proportionality was assessed throughout the response. Force remained available, but it was not treated as the starting point.
Maintaining that level of restraint during a fast-moving public order incident is harder than it sounds. Yet throughout the response, the PSNI appeared comfortable taking a measured approach even as conditions evolved around them. That reflected confidence in both the officers on the ground and the command structure guiding them.
In modern public order operations, restraint should not be mistaken for weakness. Used properly, it is a tactical strength rooted in training, leadership, professionalism and trust in the command structure. That was especially clear inside the command center, where decisions were weighed not only for their immediate operational effect but also for their long-term impact on public trust and legitimacy.
Photo courtesy Paul Goldenberg
Technology in support of leadership
Technology was another focus of the visit, particularly its role in supporting public order operations.
The discussions with public safety drone specialists from Draganfly centered on a practical question: how can tools such as drones give commanders a clearer operational picture during fast-moving incidents? Better visibility can improve situational awareness, support officer safety and help command staff understand what is happening across multiple locations at once.
The broader lesson was that technology works best when it supports the response rather than driving it.
When drones, real-time intelligence platforms and other emerging tools are properly integrated, they strengthen command decision-making. When they are not tied to command structures and operational doctrine, they can add noise instead of clarity.
For North American agencies investing in these capabilities, the challenge is not simply buying new technology. It is making sure those tools fit the way the agency commands, communicates and makes decisions under pressure.
The PSNI’s approach reinforced a point that should guide any technology investment: the tool should enhance command, not compete with it.
Final thoughts
As I left Belfast, I found myself thinking less about the riots and more about the organization that responded to them.
What I observed was a police service operating within a clear command structure, with communication embedded throughout the response and leaders who appeared comfortable making difficult decisions under pressure.
That does not mean the PSNI model should be copied wholesale, nor does it diminish the value of the Incident Command System and other public order frameworks already used throughout North America. Every community faces different challenges, and every agency must adapt to its own realities.
What Belfast offers is an opportunity to examine specific practices that may strengthen existing approaches. The discipline of Gold-Silver-Bronze command, the integration of dialogue policing and the emphasis on measured decision-making all provide lessons worth considering.
Public order incidents are becoming more complex, more visible and, in many cases, less predictable. As agencies prepare for large-scale demonstrations and major public events, the challenge will be maintaining command clarity and public trust while operating in increasingly dynamic environments.
The strongest lesson I took from Belfast was the importance of disciplined leadership. Long before officers arrive on scene, the systems, relationships and decision-making processes that guide a response are already being built. When disorder occurs, those foundations matter most.
CROWD CONTROL & PROTEST RESPONSE
“}]]
