The short version
- The Green Party of England and Wales approved a contentious motion defining Zionism as an ethnonationalist ideology akin to racism, sparking internal division and external criticism.
- Leader Zack Polanski refused to resign after losing his parliamentary seat in a London by-election, despite pressure from Jewish Greens who cited his absence during the policy vote.
- Senior figures including former leader Caroline Lucas and current Westminster head Ellie Chowns have highlighted structural flaws that allowed a small minority of members to set significant party direction.
The Green Party of England and Wales is navigating a period of intense internal conflict following the adoption of a policy motion that equates Zionism with racism. The measure, which passed at the party’s recent conference by 1,022 votes to 813, has drawn sharp criticism from Jewish organizations and divided party leadership. While the motion also calls for a single democratic Palestinian state in historic Palestine, it is the definition of Zionism as an ideology supporting an ethnonationalist Jewish state that has triggered the most significant backlash.
Ellie Chowns, the party’s Westminster leader, described the new policy as significant and damaging to the organization’s broader goals. She emphasized the need to ensure the party remains secure against capture by extremists or racists, noting that the motion was passed by a vote representing only 0.4% of the total membership base. With approximately 230,000 members overall, Chowns argued that the current policy-making structures are failing to reflect the views of the majority, both within the party and in the wider electorate.
The controversy has intensified following the defeat of party leader Zack Polanski in a by-election in Holborn and St Pancras. Polanski lost the seat to Labour candidate Sagal Abdi-Wali, securing 33% of the vote compared to Labour’s 45%. Despite this loss, which saw the Green vote share rise by 22 percentage points from the previous general election, Polanski stated he would remain in his leadership role. His decision comes amid growing pressure from within the party, particularly from Jewish Greens who argue he should have engaged more directly with the contentious policy debates.
Vivien Lichtenstein, leader of the Jewish Greens, called for Polanski’s resignation, criticizing him for avoiding a debate on the motion that declared Zionism a form of racism. She noted that Polanski left the conference early to campaign in the by-election and did not vote on the motion or its amendments. While Polanski has stated he would not have supported the motion in its final form, calling it imperfect, he acknowledged that parts of it regarding Palestinian displacement were obvious truths. This stance has failed to quell the anger among critics who feel the leadership has been too passive.
Former Green Party leader Caroline Lucas also weighed in on the crisis, suggesting that the party’s constitutional structures are outdated and no longer fit for purpose. She pointed out that the constitution was written decades ago, before the party had MPs or mayors, and argued that it does not adequately protect against entryism, where individuals join a party to change its direction from within. Lucas stressed the importance of making the Green Party a welcoming environment for Jewish people, without placing blame on Polanski personally.
Jewish organizations have been vocal in their opposition to the new policy. The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council rejected the motion’s characterization of Zionism, asserting instead that it represents anti-racism by providing a refuge for Jews after millennia of persecution. These groups argue that the party’s stance undermines efforts to combat antisemitism and alienates potential supporters who value pluralism and equal rights.
A spokesperson for the Green Party defended the democratic process, noting that membership has increased since Polanski announced his leadership bid in May 2025. They emphasized that unlike other political parties, Greens allow members to directly propose and set policy through conference votes. The spokesperson insisted that no single interest group drives policy and that every motion undergoes thorough debate before adoption.
As the party looks ahead, the focus is shifting toward reforming its internal structures to prevent similar controversies in the future. Chowns indicated she would work to address these issues, aiming to balance the party’s commitment to Palestinian rights with the need to maintain a broad and inclusive membership base. The coming months will likely see continued debate over how to reconcile the party’s progressive ideals with the practical realities of political representation and coalition-building.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- BBC News↗Green Party wants to make sure it is 'not vulnerable to extremists'
