Political desk
LONDON: Green Party leader Zack Polanski has reaffirmed his decision not to overturn the party’s controversial declaration that “Zionism is racism”, insisting that the policy will remain in place until at least 2028, despite mounting political criticism.
Polanski said he would not attempt to reverse the decision but hoped to amend aspects of the policy, particularly its support for establishing a single Palestinian state across historic Palestine. He has indicated that he would prefer Israelis and Palestinians to determine their own political future.
The declaration was adopted at the Green Party’s annual conference in Brighton earlier this month, with 1,022 members voting in favour and 813 against. It defines Zionism as a form of racism and calls for a single democratic Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
Polanski, who did not participate in the vote, has defended the party’s position on Palestinian rights while insisting that criticism of the Israeli government must remain distinct from antisemitism. He has also pledged to ensure Jewish communities feel welcome and protected within the party.
The motion has provoked a strong backlash from Jewish organisations, senior political figures and some Green Party members. Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis condemned the declaration, warning that it threatened British Jews. Israel has also barred Polanski from entering the country following the party’s decision.
The controversy has intensified tensions between Labour and the Greens. Labour has instructed its local groups to end power-sharing arrangements with Green councils that refuse to reject the policy, raising questions about the future of cooperation between the two parties.
Former Green Party co-leader Adrian Ramsay has urged councillors to reconsider support for the motion where it threatens effective local government.
The dispute has placed Polanski under pressure to reconcile the party’s pro-Palestinian position with its commitment to opposing antisemitism and protecting Jewish communities. His proposed amendments may offer a route towards compromise, but the issue remains a significant political challenge for the Greens.
4
