Vivien Lichtenstein, chair of the Jewish Greens, told the BBC that it is “quite possible” she will quit the Green Party after members passed a motion labeling Zionism a form of racism. The same resolution also backs a “single anti‑authoritarian Palestinian state in all of historical Palestine,” a formulation that includes present‑day Israel. Jewish organisations and Israel’s overseas ministry have criticised the move.
When asked by BBC Radio 4’s Today programme about her future, Lichtenstein replied, “I haven't decided yet...It is rather imaginable that I will leave the party...I'm giving it a small clip and to speech with colleagues.” She noted that she had opposed the motion from the moment she first heard about it, saying, “I don't think it's helpful and it doesn't make any difference whatsoever to Palestinians in Gaza who have suffered devastation, orphans left behind, it doesn't make any difference to Palestinians in the West Bank who are currently suffering, are currently being attacked and killed.”
The Green Party of England and Wales adopted the motion at its Brighton conference, with activist sponsors securing 1,022 votes in favour and 813 against. Although the party claims 230,000 members overall, not all attended the gathering.
Among its provisions, the motion “supports the establishment of a single anti‑authoritarian Palestinian State in all of historical Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital, equal rights for all, and the right of return for Palestinians and their descendants.” It defines Zionism as “an ideology supporting an ethnonationalist Jewish state.”
The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council, both of which denounced the text, countered that “Zionism is anti‑racism, creating a refuge for Jews in their homeland after millennia of persecution outside it.”
Lichtenstein described herself as “both Zionist and anti‑Zionist” depending on the definition, arguing that the motion’s flaw lies in the multiplicity of meanings attached to Zionism. She said she is not worried about accusations that supporting Israel’s right to exist makes her a racist—“which of course is not the case”—but labelled the motion “very nasty…crosses a line.” She added that the line was crossed because the proposers claimed to have consulted some Jews while omitting the Jewish Greens, a group that could have offered amendments to improve the text.
She observed a “vast range” of opinion within the Jewish Greens, with some members fully endorsing the motion, others backing only parts, and a minority opposing it outright. Some Jewish Greens, she noted, also favour a one‑state solution. According to Lichtenstein, party policy holds that “it's up to Israelis and Palestinians to decide their future – one state or two.”
The UK and 11 allies advocate a two‑state solution that would recognise a Palestinian state alongside Israel; Israel rejects that framework. Lichtenstein warned that the motion could lead the Green Party to accuse UK, Israeli, or Jewish organisations—including those that cooperate with Palestinians—of racism. She said she backs many of those groups in their work “against the occupation and also go out on the ground to help Palestinians.”
She also knows of non‑Jews who are considering leaving the party because “they think the motion crosses a line” and, due to their professional obligations, fear being associated with a party that lists “Zionism is racism” as policy.
When probed about antisemitism within the party, Lichtenstein said, “there are surely some antisemites in the party, I don't know about at senior level, that is not my experience.”
Zack Polanski, the party’s chair and himself Jewish, had sought to amend the motion to insert safeguards for Jewish members and to retain language referring to a “single anti‑authoritarian Palestinian state.” Both amendments were defeated. Polanski did not attend the conference to vote on either the amendment or the substantive motion; he departed early to campaign in the Holborn and St Pancras by‑election, where he is standing for MP. A complete list of candidates in that contest is available here.
In reaction, Israel’s overseas ministry announced it had barred Polanski from entering the country. A Green Party spokeswoman insisted the organisation would continue to support Jewish members and would not penalise those who attend synagogues that identify as Zionist.
After the vote, Lubna Speitan, the Green member who sponsored the motion, argued its supporters aimed to highlight “racist systems of oppression.” She declared, “We stand agreed against all forms of racism and discrimination – no exemptions.”
While most of the party’s MPs opposed the resolution, the membership remained split. On Friday’s Today programme, co‑deputy chair Rachel Millward described the motion as “problematic,” whereas her counterpart Mothin Ali told the BBC on Saturday that he would back the motion in its original form.
The Movement for Progressive Judaism, one of the UK’s largest Jewish streams, issued a statement condemning the motion as “antisemitic in its formulation and intention,” asserting, “Jewish self‑determination is simply a right. Declaring it racist is an attack on Jews.”
Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis likewise called the motion “poisonous antisemitism, a menace to British Jews and to Britain.”
The Green Party’s own wording says it “rejects attempts” to, among other things, “equate anti‑Zionism with antisemitism” and maintains that “we affirm that definitions of anti‑Jewish discrimination should not equate Jewish identity with Zionist ideology or governmental practice.”
Opposition figures swiftly responded. Labour chair Bridget Phillipson said the vote “crosses a line” and urged Polanski to “make clear that this will not be their position going forwards.” Shadow home secretary Chris Philp, speaking for the Conservatives, claimed the motion showed the Green Party was “toxic to its core.” Liberal Democrat MP Luke Taylor labelled the motion “divisive” and argued it fails to confront “the rising threats” of Islam