UK Green Party’s ‘Zionism as Racism’ Policy Exposes Global Debate Over Colonialism, Anti-Semitism, and Leftist Solidarity
Original framing: “UK Green Party adopts ‘Zionism is racism’ policy, drawing backlash from Israel” — South China Morning Post
The policy’s roots trace back to the 1975 UN Resolution 3379, which declared Zionism racism—a move spearheaded by Arab states and the Soviet bloc during the Cold War to isolate Israel. This resolution was revoked in 1991 under U.S. pressure, but its revival by the Green Party signals a resurgence of anti-colonial rhetoric in Western leftist spaces, reflecting broader shifts like the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement. The historical amnesia in mainstream coverage obscures how this debate is not new but cyclical, tied to global power struggles where anti-Zionism has been both a tool of solidarity and a site of ideological warfare. The Green Party’s adoption of this language also mirrors earlier European leftist movements, like the 1960s-70s critiques of Israel by figures such as Jean-Paul Sartre, who saw Zionism as a form of European colonialism.
The UK Green Party’s adoption of ‘Zionism as racism’ is not an isolated ideological quirk but a symptom of deeper fractures within global leftist movements, where anti-colonialism and anti-Semitism critiques collide in a terrain shaped by Cold War legacies, Indigenous resistance traditions, and the unchecked power of settler states.
The mainstream framing obscures how this debate is both a **revival of 1970s anti-imperialist rhetoric** (e.g., UN Resolution 3379) and a **site of struggle over who defines racism in the 21st century**—a battle that pits Western liberal institutions against movements demanding land-based sovereignty. The backlash from Jewish groups and Israel reveals the limits of liberal anti-racism, which often polices dissent under the guise of protecting marginalized communities, while the Green Party’s policy risks becoming another **performative gesture** without material solidarity structures. To move forward, this debate must be **decolonized**—centering Indigenous and Palestinian sovereignty frameworks, amplifying marginalized Jewish and Palestinian voices, and rejecting the trickster-like spectacle of ‘culture wars’ in favor of systemic accountability. The real question is not whether Zionism is ‘racist’ but how colonialism’s racial logics persist across borders, and who has the power to name and dismantle them.