Tehran Times, on UK Politics, 4 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Green Party Zionism as a form of racism

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

The Green Party of England and Wales has voted to declare Zionism a form of racism in an unprecedented move at its party conference in Brighton, Middle East Eye has learnt. The vote by party members on Sunday makes it - and to back a single democratic Palestinian state with equal rights for all ethnic and religious groups, rather than a two-state solution. 1,022 members voted for the motion while 813 voted against it.

Co-Deputy Leader Mothin Ali told Middle East Eye on Sunday that he was strongly in favor of the motion, unlike Green MPs Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsay, who criticized[as1] it. "As defined in the motion," Ali said, "Zionism is an ethno-nationalist state. Zionism is resulting in ethnic cleansing, in the belief that one group of people is superior to another." He added: "Now I'm a committed anti-racist. I got involved in politics through the anti-racist and anti-war movement.

And since then, I've got a real understanding of what racism looks like, whether it's structural, whether it's personal. "The belief that one group of people is superior to another, I just can't accept that." Green members voted against an amendment to the motion saying it "shall not be used to pressure, proscribe or discipline members based on affiliation with Jewish community institutions, such as synagogues, community centers or denominational groups, that describe themselves as Zionist or used to discipline or sanction Jewish members for expressing views that would be non-sanctionable if expressed by non-Jewish members (such as support for a binational state, or two state solution)."

But members voted for an amendment supporting the "inalienable right to self-determination" for Palestinians, party insiders told MEE. Ali told MEE on Sunday morning he believed the motion would shift political discourse in Britain. "In 2024 the Green Party recognised the genocide that was taking place in Gaza, before any other major political party. "So we've always led on this subject, we've led on the subject of human rights, regardless of where it is.

We're bringing other political parties with us. We're encouraging the debate to happen in society." 'Motion safeguards Jewish people' Before the start of the conference, it was widely reported that Jewish members of the Green Party who belong to synagogues that identified as Zionist could face internal disciplinary procedures. Lubna Speitan, a British Palestinian and the lead author of the motion, told MEE on Saturday this was wrong. She explained the motion is an "E-Motion," meaning it concerns external matters and has no bearing on internal processes.

"We've made explicitly clear in the motion that not all Jews are Zionist and not all Zionists are Jewish," she said. The motion was endorsed by prominent Holocaust survivor and activist Stephen Kapos, who said he believed that "Zionism both as an ideology and practice is harmful and has no legitimacy and must be rejected."

Read the original article on tehrantimes.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

The Tehran Times reports the Green Party's 1,022 to 813 vote on its Zionism motion and gives the vote count and the rejected amendment on Jewish members. In its headline and second sentence it says the party "recognizes" Zionism as racism. That verb presents the motion's position as a truth the party acknowledged, when the article's own first sentence describes a vote to declare a disputed position.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “recognizes”

    Why this matters
    The headline uses "recognizes", a verb that treats what the party voted for as an existing truth it has acknowledged.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes from the headline that Zionism being racism is settled and the Greens have simply admitted it.
    The context
    The body's own first sentence describes a vote to declare a position, passed 1,022 to 813 against opposition from the party's own MPs. The contested position belongs to the motion, not to the outlet.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“has voted to declare Zionism a form of racism”
    • Elsewhere in the article“1,022 members voted for the motion while 813 voted against it”

    Show it in the article

    “the first major party in the UK to recognize Zionism as a form of racism”

    Why this matters
    The outlet repeats "recognize" in its own voice in the body, so the presumption survives beyond the headline.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the other parties as having failed to recognise a fact, rather than as having declined to adopt a position.
    The context
    The article itself shows the position was disputed inside the party, with Green MPs Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsay criticising it. A neutral verb such as "declare" or "adopt" describes what happened.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“unlike Green MPs Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsay”

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “1,022 members voted for the motion while 813 voted against it.”

    It gives the exact vote count, so readers can see the motion passed with a sizeable minority against it.

  • “Green members voted against an amendment to the motion”

    It reports a fact unhelpful to the motion's supporters, that members rejected an amendment protecting Jewish members, and quotes the amendment in full.

  • “Lubna Speitan, a British Palestinian and the lead author of the motion”

    It names the motion's author and gives a Palestinian voice on a vote about Palestine.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Tehran Times

Everything we scored from Tehran Times