Green leader Zack Polanski proposes reform of party rules — The Guardian

In the United Kingdom, Green Party leader Zack Polanski said there is a need to change the party’s internal democratic mechanisms so that its leadership bears greater responsibility for its strategic direction. His statement came after a controversial vote at the party conference, where delegates supported a resolution defining Zionism as a form of racism.

As The Guardian reports, Polanski believes the party’s rapid growth requires an update to its procedures. Under the current rules, policy is determined by party members at conferences rather than by the leadership. Some senior Green representatives had expressed concern that such a system could give disproportionate influence to a small group of activists.

Conference vote

The resolution on Zionism was supported by 1,022 voters, while 813 voted against it. According to the publication, supporters accounted for approximately 0.4% of the party’s total membership. The document also provided for support for a single Palestinian state.

More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.

Four of the party’s five MPs opposed the resolution. It was also criticized by the European Green Party, which supports a two-state settlement. The Greens’ leader in Westminster, Ellie Chowns, said the party should not become vulnerable to the influence of extremists and racists, and called modernizing policy-making mechanisms an urgent necessity.

Polanski’s position

Polanski, who is Jewish and said he grew up in a Zionist family, wrote that the content of the resolution corresponds to his understanding of Zionism as an ideology that, in his view, underpins the displacement and genocide of Palestinians. At the same time, he stressed that Zionism is not easy to define and that for many Jews it is connected with identity, security and a sense of belonging.

In the politician’s view, the party should not determine what people must believe, and a narrow debate over definitions is neither desirable nor strategic. He also disagreed with the provisions of the resolution that determine the future form of the state in Israel and Palestine, noting that Israelis and Palestinians should decide this.