The JC has obtained a dossier of exchanges between Greens for Palestine and Jewish Greens over the past few months revealing deeply concerning attitudes towards Jews within the party. Many of the emails suggest Jews are being held responsible for the actions of Israel and other matters over which they have no responsibility. The exchanges took place within the context of a row over a proposed motion branding Zionism as racism. Here the JC is publishing long passages from the emails amid calls for an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission watchdog.
New Year’s Eve, 2025 – ‘Zionism is racism’ motion is raised
The first message regarding the planned “Zionism is racism” motion took place on New Year’s Eve last year.
An attachment containing the motion was sent to Jewish Greens. “We are writing in advance of submission to consult with you on the attached motion drafted/ supported by Palestinian members of the Green Party,” Greens for Palestine said in an email.
January 5, 2026 – Jewish Greens raise concern over consultation on motion
Jewish Greens replied saying: “I don’t think emailing SIGs [Special interest groups] three days before posting a motion onto the Agenda Forum counts as a consultation, especially during what is considered a holiday period.”
Greens for Palestine responded a day later complaining that they hadn’t even been told about the publication of a different motion, which the Jewish Group later clarified hadn’t even been submitted by them.
January 15 – Jewish Greens push back against singling out of Israel
Jewish Greens made their objections to the planned motion crystal clear.
“The response to the idea that ‘Zionism is racism’ received an almost universally hostile response, and I think that the majority of our members would prefer that it wasn’t brought forward in the current form.”
Even though some members of the left-wing party did think that it was accurate to describe Zionism as “settler-colonialism”, there were still concerns that Israel was being singled out in a way the United States and Canada – which, they claimed, could also be described as settler-colonial states – were not.
“Instead of viewing Israel as an exception from the international norm, it should be viewed as a particularly violent representation of it. If international policy were to reflect this, it should extend the analysis of racism as essential to much modern statecraft beyond Israel to other similar states,” Jewish Greens said.
The group also asked questions about what Greens for Palestine meant when condemning “Zionist propaganda” and to make clear that they did not support Hamas and other terrorist groups.
“The statement about armed struggle suggests that every group has the right to resist oppression, including through the use of force. This is not disputed. However, we are talking specifically about a political context where a significant portion of political actors, including Hamas and PIJ, are committed to using violence against civilians as a methodology of resistance. The general view amongst the officers' group was this should be acknowledged.”
Although the Jewish group urged Greens for Palestine not to “bring this motion forwards in its current form”, they offered to continue dialogue and discussion
“We would value the opportunity to listen and hear your thought processes behind the motion and its constituent parts, and hope that further discussion with our members might be helpful to you as well.”
In one email dated January 21, Greens for Palestine received correspondence from the Greenwich Palestine Alliance, which said it had received feedback from the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) and Jewish Network for Palestine (JNP).
“We are, as Jews in the UK, surprised and distraught that your members had difficulty in identifying Zionism as a deeply racist movement”, their apparent feedback on Jewish Greens’ criticism said.
They continued: “Anyone who supports Israeli crimes because they are enacted by Jews, should be ashamed of themselves. Especially, as acting in such a manner is likely to increase antisemitism and violence against Jews.”
March 6 – Jewish Greens want talks to resolve differences with Greens for Palestine
Jewish Greens then formally made a request for mediation through the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee, claiming that “there has been significant tension between the two groups and formal lines of communication have broken down (we don’t assign blame for this)”, and that it was “vital to re-open communication and to try to repair the relationship, especially in the context of widespread attacks on the party by external and malevolent bodies”.
In February, there had been increased scrutiny of the party ahead of the proposed motion, which the party’s leader Zack Polanski indicated he could support.
That same month, Israel’s embassy to the UK also expressed concern about the proposed motion, describing it as “so extreme, so hostile, and so intellectually bankrupt that its very inclusion on the agenda raises urgent questions about the direction of the party”.
March 12 - …but request for mediation is snubbed by Greens for Palestine, who demand Jewish group liberate their minds ‘from the supremacist grip of Zionism’
The Greens for Palestine declined the offer of mediation, saying that “before mediation can be considered, accountability must be established”.
They then launched a blistering attack on members of Jewish Greens.
“We address this letter specifically to those among you who have attacked our motion, our Palestinian and Muslim siblings, and engaged in racist and anti-Muslim discourse, smear and scaremonger campaigns. We do not address here all Jewish members of the Party, but we hold you as individuals accountable for your own actions and those presenting smears under the banner of ‘Jewish Greens’.”
The letter continued: “Through deliberate and malicious disinformation, smear campaigns, and the reprehensible reporting of Party members, who were simply exercising their democratic right, to counter-terror police, you have not only brought the Party into disrepute but have also directly endangered its members… These actions are unjustifiable, they raise serious concerns and demand serious consequences beyond the suggestion of mediation.”
The demands included: “Jewish Greens must publicly condemn and retract the briefing provided to right-wing press outlets like the Daily Mail and GB News.
"The briefing misrepresented Motion A105 and caused significant reputational damage to the Party.
“Jewish Greens must unequivocally condemn and address the actions of the member(s) who referred the Green Party to Counter Terrorism Police.
"This dangerous abuse of privilege weaponised state apparatus to intimidate members advocating for Palestinian rights, putting them at genuine risk of harassment, surveillance and raids.”
Greens for Palestine also demanded that Jewish Greens make a public apology to the group, the national party, Lubna Speitan, the author of the motion, Mothin Ali, the party’s deputy leader, and Polanski himself “for the distress caused and personal safety risks incurred”.
The letter added: “The referral to Counter Terrorism Police and the escalation to the Israeli embassy has had severe consequences:
• Regular death threats against our members and threat of raids.
• Significant risk to the safety and wellbeing of those targeted.
“We suggest that those of you opposing the motion question why many Jews of conscience stand with us in our struggle for freedom, and also support our motion ‘Zionism is Racism’. What of the Jews who coexisted peacefully alongside Muslims and Christians in Palestine for millennia?”
Jewish Greens were then told they had a choice: “You can join us in this endeavour for justice, liberating your own minds from the supremacist grip of Zionism that casts Palestinians, a people who were never your persecutors, as your enemy and a people to be subjugated and dominated. Or, you can remain on the side of the oppressor, a problem we will continue to confront and resist.”
Greens for Palestine continued: “We remain committed to opposing oppression in all its forms. We will continue constructive dialogue with those who act in good faith. However, the actions we have outlined have endangered members, created an unsafe environment, undermined our democracy and destroyed trust.
"There can be no path to mediation without accountability.”
March 18 – ‘We are not responsible for Israeli government’ Jewish Greens argue back
Jewish Greens responded to Greens for Palestine, robustly rejecting the many charges and demands from Greens for Palestine.
On the call to liberate their minds from Zionism, they responded: “We are not sure how this should be achieved or evidenced.”
The reply continued: “Our views on Zionism are diverse, with many people in the group describing themselves as anti- or non-Zionists. One of the key sticking points in the dispute seems to be whether Zionists should be excluded from the party. To ask us not to have members of the group who haven’t ‘liberated their minds from Zionism’ as a pre-condition for discussion would negate the point of the dispute. It would not be achievable.”
The group rejected the assertion that they had been critically briefing the media about the motion: “We are unable to retract any briefing to right-wing news outlets such as GB News or the Daily Mail. This is because no such briefing has been issued, and therefore we cannot retract a briefing that doesn’t exist,” they said, adding: “We are aware that the right-wing press, and malicious individuals have been attacking the motion and the party more widely, and one of the reasons we want to come to a resolution is to help combat effectively attacks on the party.”
The group also wholeheartedly defended the integrity of the nature of their disagreement over the content of the motion: “We have not published any disinformation on our website. We have a briefing where we expressed our concerns about the motion, as a disagreement about policy, and these concerns are sincere”, adding: “You are alleging that we produced our briefing with the deliberate intent to deceive with malice, which is a very serious allegation. We reject it and urge you to provide evidence of this.”
Jewish Greens also rejected the demands for public apologies, the actions of the Israeli embassy or the referral to counterterrorism.
“We would like to remind you that Jewish people in the diaspora are not responsible for the actions of the Israeli state or its agents, and to try and hold us accountable for such is as racist as trying to hold all Muslims accountable for the actions of the Indonesian government”, the group said, adding: “We, as Jewish Greens, did not cause, or invite the Israeli embassy’s statement.
"We did not have the capacity to prevent it. We therefore cannot offer any meaningful apology for events for which we had no role and no responsibility.”
They went on: “If there is any reason to believe that Jewish Greens officers have been secretly coordinating with the Israeli government, we urge you to provide it, and we will assess if there was any negligence on our part.
“Similarly, we cannot apologise for the referral to the counter-terrorism police. We had no role in this and bear no responsibility and, therefore, such an apology would have no meaning. We are sorry to hear that your members have been experiencing death threats. It is not OK. You have our sympathy and our solidarity. If you have any evidence that Jewish Greens officers or members have been threatening you or coordinating a campaign of threats, we urge you to provide it.”
Despite their emphatic objections to the motion, Jewish Greens still attempted to find a workable solution, concluding their email by saying: “We hope this offers some clarity to our position.
"We are still keen to meet for mediation, if this explanation has resolved some of your reservations. If you don’t feel this is sufficient, this door will always be open, and we will continue to look for other ways we can move forward together.”
Report which states Green Party is ‘not immune’ to antisemitism
The JC has also obtained Jewish Greens’ report ahead of their annual general meeting later this month.
In it, they hint at some of the difficulties encountered in the party: “This has been another challenging, but productive, time since the last AGM for Jewish Greens. Challenging, because of the rise in antisemitism in society at large, which the Green Party is not immune to.”
Mentioning rejection of their mediation offer, they also defended taking an “uncharacteristically strong stand against the motion”, claiming that as well as their objections to the motion’s content, they were “also concerned about the reputational damage to the party among Jewish communities, not least because this is then amplified on the national stage by the press and used as an attack line on the party.
“We believe there are better ways for the party to use its time and energies to support Palestinians and challenge Israel following the unacceptable loss of life and devastation of Gaza wrought by the IDF, plus the killings and other human rights abuses perpetrated by settlers in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.”
In another email to an anonymised recipient, dated May 29, Greens for Palestine indicated that they would be publishing anonymised correspondence of their exchanges with Jewish Greens, in response to seeing Jewish Greens’ AGM report and an article by a member of Jewish Greens, written in a personal capacity, which labelled the motion antisemitic.
The article said: “The motion includes policy to create one Palestinian state in place of Israel. To deny Jews self-determination and the option to have their own nation without any consultation is antisemitic”.
Greens for Palestine said: “We find it deeply problematic that these accusations can go unchallenged, and since we do not have an official capacity to publish our own report through the party AGM, we will have to resort to publishing the full information to clear the record.”
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.