Labour’s genocide vote shows the irrelevance of far left activism - The Jewish Chronicle

At Labour's conference in Liverpool, delegates passed a motion accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza – a claim the government itself rejected just weeks ago. The vote exposes how far the party's activist wing has drifted from both its leadership and from reality.

The government spent considerable political capital appeasing activists who repaid them with embarrassment at conference. The leadership calculated that sacrificing coherent foreign policy for a few domestic votes would go unnoticed. They hoped symbolic gestures such as a partial arms suspension would satisfy the activist base while maintaining relationships with Israel and others. The strategy failed on both counts.

The motion, proposed by UNISON and seconded by ASLEF, demands the government “employ all means” to prevent genocide. This not only misuses the definition of genocide, but it also ignores the fact that the government no longer holds any influence following hostile gestures towards Israel designed to please those same activists. The motion also calls to implement a full arms embargo, when the government have clearly stated such measures would endanger British and European security. The tail is wagging the dog.

Astonishingly, the motion makes no mention of Hamas or the October 7 massacre. It ignores the 48 hostages still held captive. By omitting these facts, the motion presents the Gaza conflict as if it began unprovoked – an inversion of what actually happened. This isn't just poor analysis; it's a moral failure that tramples on the memory of those murdered and kidnapped.

How can anyone claim to seek peace while erasing Hamas's war crimes and the very events that triggered this war? The silence on Hamas isn't an oversight, it’s a choice that reveals the motion's true purpose: not to end suffering, but to assign blame to only one side.

The motion cites a UN Commission of Inquiry report authored by three panellists with documented anti-Israel records, one of who said social media was run by “the Jewish lobby”. It also references a resolution by the International Association of Genocide Scholars — an organisation whose membership verification was so lax that internet pranksters added fictional characters from Sesame Street, Star Wars, pet dogs and historical villains such as Adolf Hitler to its roster. This was the “growing international consensus” delegates accepted. The motion conveniently ignored the counter-letter signed by four times as many scholars refuting these claims.

Both UNISON and ASLEF are affiliated with the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign (PSC), which organised protests against Israel on October 7 itself, before any Israeli response. The PSC's affiliation with these and other unions explains much about this motion's one-sided framing and its celebration of the vote.

While conference activists played politics, others have been working toward actual solutions. The US has presented plans for Gaza's reconstruction and deradicalisation with a transitional government – plans which Netanyahu has agreed to. Saudi Arabia is reportedly ready to join the Abraham Accords, building on the progress made by the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco. These developments represent the most significant shift in Middle Eastern diplomacy in decades. Real peace is being built by those focused on pragmatic outcomes, not performative gestures.

Labour’s plan for Gaza requires only that Hamas agree to a ceasefire. It’s easier said than done, because the prospect has been undermined by Britain's premature recognition of Palestinian statehood. By rewarding Hamas for the “fruits of October 7” before securing peace, the UK removed what little leverage remained. The gesture looks more foolish by the day.

Britain's influence in the Middle East is already diminished. Motions like this ensure it will decline further still. The activists who passed this resolution claim to care about Palestinian suffering, yet their maximalist demands and refusal to acknowledge Hamas's role make them irrelevant to any serious peace process. Their moral preening comes at the expense of both British interests and any realistic path to ending the conflict they claim to oppose.

Just when things couldn't get worse for Labour, the obsessive fixation that defined the Corbyn years has returned. Sudan faces the world's largest humanitarian crisis, yet it merited no conference motion. Neither did Ukraine, despite its direct threat to European security. Syria, Congo, Yemen, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Chad: all overshadowed. Conflicts with higher death tolls receive no attention. The selectivity reveals this isn't about humanitarian concern, it’s about ideology and something worse. For these activists, only one conflict matters.

This selective outrage doesn't just undermine Britain's credibility – it ensures our exclusion from the peace process altogether. As regional powers forge new alliances and chart a path forward, Britain will be watching from the sidelines, having squandered its influence on gestures designed to appease activists who will never be satisfied. The Middle East's future is being shaped without us, and conference motions like this are the reason why.

Alex Hearn is the director of Labour Against Antisemitism

To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.

Topics:

Labour