The Green Party of England and Wales is facing significant internal turmoil and international criticism after adopting a controversial policy that characterizes Zionism as a form of racism and calls for the replacement of Israel with a single Palestinian state. The binding motion was passed at the party’s annual conference in Brighton on Sunday by a vote of 1,022 to 813, despite opposition from four of the party’s five Members of Parliament.
The motion sparked strong reactions within the party and beyond. Vivien Lichtenstein, chair of the Jewish Greens, expressed deep concern about the decision and indicated she might leave the party. While some Jewish members hold differing views on the policy, Lichtenstein described it as unhelpful and warned it could lead to disciplinary actions against Jewish organizations affiliated with Zionism, including synagogues—though supporters of the motion deny such outcomes. She emphasized her worry that the party might accuse UK-based, Israeli-Jewish, and joint Arab-Jewish groups of racism, potentially undermining organizations that actively oppose the Israeli occupation and support Palestinian rights.
The motion equates Zionism—the movement for a Jewish state—with racism and endorses a single democratic Palestinian state in place of Israel, advocating equal rights for all inhabitants. This stance represents a departure from the party’s previous policy, which left the question of one- or two-state solutions to be decided by Israelis and Palestinians.
The policy has provoked a strong backlash internationally. The European Green Party, which includes the Greens of England and Wales among its 47 member parties, reiterated its support for a two-state solution and condemned the new motion as contradicting those principles. Felix Banaszak, co-leader of the German Greens (Alliance 90/The Greens), called the policy “intolerable and unacceptable,” stating it conflicts with both the German Greens’ stance and the broader European Green Party’s position supporting Israel’s right to exist. Banaszak indicated that his party plans to consult with European partners on how to respond.
Within the UK, the policy also led to resignations, including Sandy Ruthven, chair of Amnesty International UK’s charitable trust and a longtime Green member, who accused the party of failing to adequately confront antisemitism. The decision has fueled debate over the effectiveness of the Greens’ decentralized policymaking processes, which rely heavily on the input of a small fraction of members at biannual conferences. Ellie Chowns, a Green MP and former co-leader, called for urgent modernization of party governance, noting that motions such as this—voted on by less than 1% of the membership—raise questions about the representativeness of decisions.
Amid growing dissatisfaction, some party activists criticized Zack Polanski, leader of the Greens in England and Wales, for missing the conference vote. Polanski encouraged supporters to abstain from attending the conference to campaign in an upcoming parliamentary by-election, a strategy some members believe contributed to the motion’s passage. Polanski did not take a public stance on the motion but referenced the death toll in Gaza to justify its general argument. Israel has barred Polanski from entering the country in response to the policy, with the Israeli foreign ministry calling it “a clear antisemitic text.”
Legal experts have also weighed in, suggesting the motion may be vulnerable to challenge under the UK’s Equality Act 2010, which protects against discrimination. Adam Wagner KC, a barrister involved in previous legal challenges over antisemitism in political parties, described the policy as potentially discriminatory against individuals holding Zionist beliefs and Jewish people more broadly.
The Green Party of England and Wales has been contacted for comment but has not issued an official statement addressing the ongoing debate and fallout.