Green motion on Zionism widens divisions as deputy backs proposal
A proposed Green Party motion defining Zionism as racism and backing a single Palestinian state across historic Palestine has deepened divisions within the party. Deputy co-leader Mothin Ali says he will support it, while leader Zack Polanski plans to abstain and has called for an amendment; former leaders warn the wording could alienate Jewish people and weaken support for Palestinians.
The motion proposes boycotts and sanctions against Israel, comparing them with measures imposed on apartheid-era South Africa. Ali connected Zionism with the Israeli assault on Gaza, while Polanski said his priority was equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians and that political parties should defend people’s rights rather than decide the form of a future settlement. Former leader Carla Denyer said she could not back the motion, arguing it risked setting back efforts to help Palestinians.
- A Green Party motion on Zionism has exposed internal divisions.
- Mothin Ali plans to back it; Zack Polanski plans to abstain.
- Former leaders say its wording could alienate Jewish people.
New here? Start with this
Zionism is a political movement historically associated with establishing and supporting a Jewish state in the Middle East. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict involves competing claims to the same territory, with Palestinians seeking their own independent state in that region.
The Green Party is debating a motion that would define Zionism as racism and call for a single Palestinian state across historic Palestine. The motion also calls for boycotts and sanctions against Israel, comparing them to measures used against apartheid-era South Africa.
The proposal has revealed divisions within the party over how best to support Palestinian rights and promote peace. Different members hold different views on whether such positions and strong language serve these goals, reflecting broader questions about how political parties should engage with contested international issues.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The motion reflects a structural analysis that Zionism as practised has created a system denying Palestinians equal rights and self-determination, justifying strong advocacy including BDS parallels to apartheid-era measures that contributed to change. Supporting Palestinians effectively requires naming these systems clearly and prioritising their right to self-determination, particularly given the ongoing assault on Gaza.
The case against
Political parties best serve justice by advocating universal principles—equal rights for all people—rather than prescribing specific state structures, and risk alienating Jewish supporters and moderate allies whose backing strengthens Palestinian advocacy. Clear language about individual rights and dignity proves more durable and persuasive than framing that may be read as dismissive of Jewish identity, potentially undermining the very Palestinian cause the motion aims to advance.
Elections Middle East Paranormal Politics Weird & Viral World
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Green split on ‘Zionism is racism’ plan deepens as Polanski’s deputy vows to vote for it – after ex-leaders warn it will alienate Jews”.