Kettling: boiling up conflict?

Kettling is the police tactic of corralling protestors within a cordon, and denying them freedom of movement or exit for an extended period. In some cases, protestors in the cordoned area have been denied access to water, food and toilets. In a recent case in London, when the protestors (and others inadvertently caught in the cordon) were finally allowed to exit through a corridor of police officers, all were individually photographed.

I defend the right of police officers to protect property from vandalism, and to protect persons from injury and intimidation. The question the tactic of kettling raises is: does it achieve this desired end or is it counter-productive?

Kettling, as its name suggests, causes a boiling of frustration and resentment on the part of those who gather to express their view publicly and then find their movement severely restricted. What the proponents of kettling have misunderstood is the psychology of crowds. When a large group of people, who are sufficiently motivated to come into a metropolitan centre to express publicly a strongly held view, are then penned-in for many hours, their level of frustration builds. Some, out of frustration, attempt to break through the cordon; this prompts a defensive (and sometimes offensive) reaction by police officers attempting to maintain the cordon. The result is conflict, violence and injury (to protestors, police officers and police horses).

Would it not be far better to deploy police cordons around those buildings that are deemed to be at risk of attack (government buildings; the headquarters of political parties, etc) and otherwise deploy police in a non-confrontational manner that facilitates the movement of protestors to a suitable public space, thereby both defusing potential frustration and minimising disruption? This would allow the vast majority of protestors to express their view peaceably, thereby freeing other police officers to pursue and arrest a minority who commit vandalism and assault.

In every free and democratic nation, public protest is an essential escape-valve for the build-up of pressure caused by discontentment. Surely a way can be found of minimising the disruption that a large protest inevitably causes; whilst also allowing legitimate and peaceable protest to take place? Or am I being hopelessly naive?