UK Green Party's Zionism-Racism Vote Sparks Diplomatic Row and Internal Divisions

The United Kingdom's Green Party has formally adopted a definition of Zionism as a form of racism, a move that has triggered sharp condemnation from Israel and exposed deep fractures within the party's own ranks. The binding resolution was passed during the party's conference over the weekend, alongside a broader package of policies strongly supportive of Palestinian rights.

According to the party, the motion equating Zionism with racism secured approval by a margin of 1,022 votes to 813. In addition to that core definition, members endorsed a call for "the establishment of a single democratic state throughout historic Palestine," reaffirmed support for the Palestinian right of return, and recommitted to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

The party framed its position in a statement, arguing that the "real, material, manifestation of Zionism has been the historic and ongoing dehumanisation, displacement, dispossession, disenfranchisement and destruction of Palestinians." That language forms the ideological backbone of the resolution and has become the focal point of both international criticism and internal dissent.

The vote was far from unanimous in its consequences. Four of the party's five members of parliament came out against parts of the resolution, a striking display of internal disagreement over such a high-profile policy position. Deputy leader Rachel Millward publicly voiced her reservations on social media, writing that while the party remains committed to stopping what she described as a genocide, the term Zionism carries "different things to different people." She added that she personally did not believe the policy advanced the work the party hoped to accomplish.

Party leader Zack Polanski, who is Jewish, was absent from the conference while campaigning in a by-election for a London constituency previously represented by former Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Speaking to journalists afterward, Polanski said that if Zionism is understood as the displacement of Palestinians, "that is clearly racist." However, he distanced himself from the call for a single Palestinian state, arguing that external entities should not dictate the shape of any future state.

Israel's response was swift and severe. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused the Greens of legitimising "terrorism" and wrote on social media that the party had "adopted not only the green of Hamas, but also its ideology: the elimination of the State of Israel through armed struggle." Israeli President Isaac Herzog claimed the resolution would "deliberately endanger Jews and Israelis everywhere," while opposition leader Yair Lapid labelled the party "racist."

On Monday, Israel banned Polanski from entering the country, a decision announced just one day before he was due to face a by-election in the London seat formerly held by Starmer. The timing added a diplomatic dimension to what had already become a domestic political controversy.

The Green Party has pushed back against the charge that criticising Israel amounts to anti-Semitism. In a statement issued on Sunday, Polanski and other senior party figures insisted there is "no conflict between supporting the rights of Palestinians and the rights of Jewish people," and reiterated the party's opposition to "any form of discrimination or harassment."

The controversy is not without historical precedent. In 1975, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, which "determines that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination." The measure was sponsored by the Soviet bloc and the Arab League and passed with 72 votes in favour, largely from Middle Eastern and African nations. Israel and 34 other countries, chiefly Western states, voted against it, while 32 nations abstained. The resolution was later revoked in 1991.

The context leading up to that 1975 vote included Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's "olive branch" speech at the General Assembly a year earlier, which elevated the Palestinian cause on the world stage. Around the same period, African nations opposing South Africa's apartheid regime were increasingly drawing parallels between that system of institutionalised racial segregation and Israel's treatment of Palestinians.

Zionism itself emerged as a political ideology in the late 19th century, calling for the creation of a Jewish homeland amid rising anti-Semitism and persecution of Jews in Europe. Theodore Herzl, an Austro-Hungarian journalist widely regarded as the father of political Zionism, initially proposed an independent and colonial Jewish state in either Palestine or Argentina.

The Green Party's resolution thus places it within a long and contentious tradition of equating Zionism with racism, a comparison that remains one of the most heated fault lines in international debates over Israel and Palestine. For the party, the vote represents a formalisation of its pro-Palestine stance; for its critics, it crosses a line into delegitimising the State of Israel itself.

What remains unclear is how the resolution will affect the party's electoral fortunes and its internal cohesion. With four of five MPs opposed and a deputy leader publicly questioning the policy's utility, the Greens now face the challenge of reconciling a grassroots-driven mandate with the reservations of their own parliamentary representatives and the diplomatic fallout from Israel's retaliatory measures.