Green Party members will vote next month on whether to declare the party officially anti-Zionist and adopt the position that “Zionism is racism”.
The motion, submitted by the internal campaign group Greens for Palestine, came first in a ballot used by members to prioritise proposals for the party’s autumn conference in Brighton.
If approved, it would also commit the Greens to supporting a single Palestinian state across what the motion calls “historic Palestine”, with Jerusalem as its capital, equal rights for everyone and a right of return for Palestinians and their descendants.
It would mark a significant change from the party’s previous support for the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel.
Green leader Zack Polanski has not publicly said how he will vote on the final motion. He is reported to have concerns about its wording and the effect it could have on Jewish members.
What the motion says
The proposal argues that Zionism, broadly understood as support for Jewish national self-determination and the establishment or continued existence of Israel as a Jewish state, has produced a system of discrimination against Palestinians.
Greens for Palestine describes it as “a racist ideology incompatible with Green values” and wants the party to reject attempts to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
The motion states:
“The Green Party rejects attempts to normalise the racist subjugation and oppression of Palestinians.”
It also calls for “a single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital, equal rights for all, and the right of return for Palestinians and their descendants”.
The proposal affirms what it describes as the Palestinian people’s right to resist occupation “by all available means under international law”.
The Times reports that supporters will distribute a booklet at the conference defending the motion. Lubna Speitan, who wrote the proposal, says in the booklet that activists must bring an end to “this racism and the monstrous state that has been built upon it”.
The motion would also commit the Greens to campaigning for Palestine Action to be removed from the list of proscribed terrorist organisations.
Greens respond to claim about ‘armed’ resistance
The wording on resistance is likely to become one of the most heavily contested parts of the debate.
The Times describes the proposal as supporting “armed” Palestinian resistance. The motion itself refers to resistance by all available means permitted under international law.
A Green Party spokesperson said the party supported the right of people living under occupation to resist in ways that complied with international humanitarian law. The spokesperson added that the Greens “unequivocally condemn” actions that break those laws, including indiscriminate rocket attacks.
That qualification matters. International law does not give armed groups an unrestricted right to attack civilians, take hostages or use indiscriminate violence.
Supporters of the motion argue that condemning Palestinian violence without recognising the violence of occupation creates a double standard. Opponents say the language is too broad and could be read as offering political cover for armed groups.
Jewish Greens urge members to reject it
Jewish Greens, the party’s official group for Jewish members, has campaigned against the proposal.
Its members argue that Zionism has several meanings and includes people who support Palestinian rights, oppose Israel’s government and still believe Jewish people have a right to national self-determination.
Treating every form of Zionism as racism, they warn, could categorise Jewish members as racists because of their beliefs about Israel rather than anything they have said or done.
There are also concerns about how the policy would be enforced. If Zionism were formally defined as racism, members who continued to identify as Zionists could face complaints or disciplinary proceedings.
The Guardian reported that some senior Greens fear the motion would leave Jewish supporters feeling unwelcome.
Supporters reject the suggestion that the motion is directed against Jewish people. They argue that Zionism is a political ideology and should be open to criticism in the same way as any other nationalist movement.
That disagreement sits at the heart of the row. Opposition to Israeli government policy is not inherently antisemitic. Nor does support for Palestinian statehood require hostility towards Jewish people. The argument is over whether the motion carefully preserves those distinctions or wipes them away.
Polanski faces a defining vote
Polanski is Jewish and has spoken repeatedly about the antisemitic abuse he receives. He has also been one of Westminster’s strongest critics of Israel’s conduct in Gaza.
Earlier this year, he suggested he could support the phrase “Zionism is racism” if Zionism were defined specifically through the actions of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
“If the definition of Zionism is what is happening right now by the Israeli government, then yes, absolutely, that’s racist.”
That is narrower than the motion now heading to conference, which treats Zionism itself as racist rather than limiting the description to the policies of Israel’s current government.
Reports suggest Polanski and the party’s MPs would have opposed an earlier version of the motion at the spring conference. It was never put to a vote after the event ran out of time.
The proposal has now returned and finished first in the autumn conference priority ballot, making a debate highly likely. Polanski is reportedly sympathetic to amendments that would soften its wording, but he has not publicly stated a position on the motion as submitted.
The vote comes days before Polanski’s by-election
The timing could hardly be more politically sensitive.
The Green conference begins in Brighton on 2 October. Four days after it ends, Polanski will contest the Holborn and St Pancras by-election in an attempt to take Keir Starmer’s former seat from Labour.
As The Daily Britain previously reported, independent candidate Andrew Feinstein has withdrawn and endorsed Polanski, improving the Greens’ chances of consolidating voters who see Gaza as a defining issue.
A vote on Zionism immediately before polling day could strengthen Polanski among some pro-Palestinian voters. It could also dominate the final days of the campaign and expose divisions inside a party presenting itself as a serious national alternative to Labour.
The Greens have already adopted a much harder position on Israel than the other main parties. Polanski has called for the UK-Israel trade agreement to be withdrawn and for stronger sanctions, demands he repeated at the party’s local election launch.
This conference vote goes further. It asks members to decide whether opposition to Israel’s conduct should become opposition to Zionism in every form, and whether a single Palestinian state should replace the party’s previous support for two states.
Whatever members decide, Polanski will be expected to own the result.
One response to “Greens to vote on making ‘Zionism is racism’ official party policy”
-
This is the objective of most Palestinians. There are about 7million Jews in the area and about 7.6 million Arabs so a true democracy would empower Arabs far more than today. The right of return would be critical.
Debate not war.
Leave a Reply