Al Arabiya English, on UK Politics, 4 October 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

UK Green party adopts ‘Zionism is racism’ policy

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

The UK’s left-wing Green party on Sunday voted to define Zionism as racism at the party’s annual get-together, drawing sharp backlash from British Jewish groups and the Israeli government. Members of the Green party, which has five MPs in Britain’s 650-seat parliament and which enjoyed a boost in recent local and special elections, backed the motion at the party’s conference, with 1,022 votes in favour and 813 against. For all the latest headlines, follow our Google News channel online or via the app.

According to the motion, Zionism would be “treated as any other form of racism” and the party supports the establishment of a “single democratic Palestinian State in all of historic Palestine.” “This has been a serious and deeply felt debate within our membership,” a Green spokesperson said. The Greens have enjoyed a surge in popularity under the charismatic leadership of Zack Polanski, attracting voters dissatisfied with the center-left Labor government’s stance on .

However, Polanski’s popularity has taken a hit in recent months, polls show, . “This motion would make the Green Party the first electorally significant UK political party in living memory to adopt what appears to be an overtly antisemitic political platform,” three Jewish community groups said in a letter to the party ahead of the vote. “We also emphasized the implications for the safety and welfare of all British Jews,” the heads of the Board of Deputies, Community Security Trust and Jewish Leadership Council warned.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never gives the motion's own definition of Zionism or its explicit caveat that anti-Zionism should not be equated with antisemitism. Without it, a reader who has just read the claim of an 'overtly antisemitic political platform' believes the motion makes no distinction between Jews and a political project.

How we know

Israel’s foreign ministry said the policy went “far beyond the boundaries of legitimate political debate.” “Every political party in Britain, first and foremost the governing Labor Party, must unequivocally reject this twisted resolution,” Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said. Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, called the Green party’s decision “a disgrace.” “, and it forms the basis for the Jewish people’s right to a state and a national home in the Land of Israel,” Herzog said on X. The motion laid bare divisions in the party with Polanski -- who is currently running to become an MP in former prime minister Keir Starmer’s London constituency -- skipping the vote.

Despite at least three out of five Green MPs opposing the motion, Polanski said earlier this week that the “displacement and genocide of the Palestinian people” was “clearly racism.” United Nations investigators in the war in Gaza, a finding that Israel has rejected. Read more: Israeli gov’t response to UK-led embargo ‘childish and extreme’: Former Israeli PM Advertisement Advertisement

Read the original article on english.alarabiya.net (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

Al Arabiya reports the Green Party's 1,022 to 813 vote accurately, but closes by calling the UN finding of genocide an accusation in scare quotes and leaves Israel's rejection as the last word. In its own voice it calls Israel's genocide in Gaza 'the Israel-Hamas war'. It gives Israel's government and its president four sentences while no supporter of the motion is quoted, and it omits the motion's own caveat that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism.

  1. Hedges the documented record

    Serious

    “have accused Israel of committing “genocide””

    Why this matters
    The words 'accused' and the quotation marks around 'genocide' turn a UN Commission of Inquiry's finding into an allegation.
    The impression it gives
    That genocide in Gaza is an open charge made by some investigators, not a finding.
    The context
    A UN Commission of Inquiry has found that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. That is the documented record, not one side's claim.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    A UN Commission of Inquiry has found that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Israel rejects the finding.

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the Israel-Hamas war”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the outlet names Israel's assault on Gaza as a war between two sides.
    The impression it gives
    That the events behind the motion are a two-sided war, not a genocide.
    The context
    A UN Commission of Inquiry has found Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. The article itself later reports that UN investigators made that finding.

    How we know

    • On the recordA UN Commission of Inquiry has found that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.ohchr.org (opens in a new tab)
    • Elsewhere in the article“United Nations investigators have accused Israel”

    Show it in the article

  3. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people”

    Why this matters
    Herzog's definition of Zionism is printed in full, after Israel's foreign ministry has two sentences and Israel's president another.
    The impression it gives
    That the Israeli state's account of Zionism is the definition the motion must answer to.
    The context
    The article quotes no one who proposed or backed the motion. The only Green voice is a neutral spokesperson line and a Polanski remark from earlier in the week. The motion's author, Lubna Speitan, is never named.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  4. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “following several missteps”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the outlet says Polanski made missteps and that polls show his popularity falling, but names no misstep and no poll.
    The impression it gives
    That Polanski's errors are established fact behind a measured fall in support.
    The context
    The article gives no poll, no figure and no example of any misstep.

    Show it in the article

  5. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never gives the motion's own definition of Zionism or its explicit caveat that anti-Zionism should not be equated with antisemitism. Without it, a reader who has just read the claim of an 'overtly antisemitic political platform' believes the motion makes no distinction between Jews and a political project.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Our analysisThe papers wrote 447 articles on the Greens' Zionism vote. Israel, pro-Israel groups and the Chief Rabbi got 12,133 words. Palestinians got 3,173.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Al Arabiya English

Everything we scored from Al Arabiya English