The Green Party of England and Wales has officially voted to classify Zionism as a form of racism, passing a contentious resolution by a tally of 1,022 to 813 at its annual party conference in Brighton. This historic decision makes the Greens the first prominent political party in Britain to formally integrate anti-Zionism into its foundational platform. It marks an unprecedented foreign policy shift that has sparked immediate pushback from veteran party leaders, lawmakers, and external organizations.
The approved resolution defines Zionism as an “ethnonationalist political project” and asserts that its historical execution has resulted in the displacement and oppression of Palestinians. Along with branding the ideology as racist, the approved platform explicitly calls for the replacement of the current two-state paradigm with a single democratic state across historic Palestine. It guarantees equal rights for all ethnic and religious groups alongside the right of return for displaced Palestinians and their descendants.
Inside the Landmark Floor Vote and Defeated Amendments
The Green Party vote followed nearly twelve months of fierce internal discussion after initially being deferred at an earlier spring session. When the measure finally arrived on the conference floor, opponents mounted several challenges in an effort to soften the platform text. Every major attempt to dilute the language was rejected by the voting membership.
Delegates struck down three separate substantive amendments before passing the primary measure:
- The first amendment was defeated by a tally of 920 to 821.
- The second proposed revision fell by 948 to 798.
- A third challenge was rejected by a decisive margin of 1,086 to 684.
A final procedural amendment passed via a show of hands to harmonize existing platform records with the newly ratified position. Only ten ballots were reported spoiled during the final count. A party representative defended the process as an exercise in internal democracy, reaffirming the organization’s overarching commitments to civil liberties and international law.
“The Green Party is an anti-racist party and has consistently opposed the illegal occupation of both Palestinian and Syrian land, called for an end to arms sales to the Israeli government and spoken out fearlessly about the devastating situation in Gaza and the West Bank,” a party spokesperson stated following the conclusion of the conference.
High-Profile Fractures and Leadership Reactions
The vote has pitted grassroots activists against some of the party’s most recognized legislative figures. Key parliamentary leaders openly expressed alarm that the measure undermines long-standing party positions favoring mutual self-determination.
Caroline Lucas, who made history in 2010 as the first elected Green Member of Parliament, publicly voiced her opposition to the policy change. “There is no single definition of Zionism, and irrespective of the intentions of the people who put that motion forward, I think there is a real risk that it’ll be divisive and could be seen as a sign that Jewish people aren’t welcome in the party,” Lucas warned.
Adrian Ramsay, elected to Parliament representing Waveney Valley, also criticized the decision to abandon the framework established in the party’s recent national campaign manifesto. Ramsay stated that adopting a stance perceived as denying statehood rights to both Israelis and Palestinians contradicts the core principle of equal rights for all communities.
Party Leader Zack Polanski’s Position
Party leader Zack Polanski, who is himself Jewish, did not cast a ballot during the conference vote. Records show Polanski departed the event early to campaign in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election. Prior to the vote, Polanski told a hustings audience that he identifies as an anti-Zionist and argued that the philosophy can constitute a form of racism when expressed through displacement and territorial expansion.
The internal debate was further reflected among Jewish party members. A pre-conference survey conducted by Jewish Greens revealed that while 81% of surveyed members did not identify as Zionist, significant differences of opinion prompted the internal affiliate to refrain from taking a unified collective stance.
Myth vs. Reality: Parsing the Party’s Stance
The contentious debate surrounding the Green Party vote has generated significant confusion regarding what the text actually mandates versus common public perceptions:
- Myth: The resolution conflates opposition to Zionism with general discrimination against Jewish people.
- Reality: The official text explicitly separates the two, stating directly that opposition to Zionism must not be equated with antisemitism or hostility toward Jewish individuals.
- Myth: The policy change represents the party’s first critical stance on Middle Eastern foreign policy.
- Reality: The party previously adopted resolutions describing Israeli military operations in Gaza as genocide, labeling state practices as apartheid, and endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) framework alongside full arms embargoes.
Key Platform Shifts at a Glance
The newly ratified framework introduces several concrete changes to how the party approaches the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
- Ideological Definition: Designates Zionism as an ethnonationalist project and a form of racism.
- Diplomatic Solution: Endorses a single democratic state across historic Palestine.
- Right of Return: Formally supports return rights for Palestinians and descendants.
- Antisemitism Distinction: Explicitly separates anti-Zionist political critique from antisemitism.
- Trade and Defense Policy: Maintains calls for full arms embargoes and backing for the BDS movement.
The policy adoption marks an aggressive departure from traditional diplomatic stances favored by mainstream Western political organizations. While platform proponents argue the text brings ideological clarity to human rights advocacy, elected leaders must now navigate the fallout of a deeply divided membership as the political landscape shifts.
