Zack Polanski, leader of the Green Party, has faced renewed scrutiny after claiming there are “definitely examples” of the Israeli government using “false flags”, as divisions over Israel and Zionism deepen within the party.
The comments, made on an episode of Polanski’s Bold Politics podcast, have emerged as the Greens prepare to vote on a controversial motion declaring that “Zionism will be treated as any other form of racism”.
Polanski said the issue was particularly difficult to navigate because of the persistence of antisemitism on parts of the political left.
“What I find really difficult to navigate is anti-Semitism on the Left,” he told listeners.
“Because, again, I want to be really clear: there are definitely examples of where the Israeli government [has] used false flags.”
Polanski subsequently referred to the Hannibal Directive, an Israeli military procedure intended to prevent soldiers being captured. The directive was officially revoked in 2016, although its alleged use and interpretation have remained the subject of intense controversy.
The Green leader also acknowledged the dangers of allowing suspicion to become conspiracy.
He conceded that some people on the left can become “distracted” or “see false flags or conspiracy theories in places where we don’t have evidence for it”.
“I think it undermines the real fight against anti-Semitism that we have in this country, which as a Left-wing movement we stand against all forms of racism,” he said.
“So that has to be part of it too. I can understand why people are angry. I really understand why people are angry. I can understand why people want to hold people to account as soon as possible.”
He added: “How do you harness that true motivation and at the same time encourage people to take a breath and say when we make accusations or when we put things out there, it has to be based [on] evidence – otherwise, we’re undermining our own movement.”
The remarks come as the Green Party conference has been dominated by an increasingly bitter debate over Zionism, with members preparing to vote on a motion that would formally define Zionism as a form of racism.
Under the proposed policy, the party says Zionism “will be treated as any other form of racism”. The motion would be implemented by the party’s anti-racism policy working group.
More significantly, the proposal calls for the abolition of Israel as a state and advocates the creation of a “single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine”.
The proposal has exposed tensions between sections of the party’s leadership and senior figures who fear its language could alienate Jewish members and supporters.
Polanski, who is Jewish, has declined to state his personal position on the motion and will not vote on it. Instead, he is campaigning ahead of Thursday’s Holborn and St Pancras by-election, where he is standing as the Green candidate.
Asked whether Israel has a right to exist, Polanski avoided endorsing either the Israeli state or its abolition.
“I believe that people have a right to exist. Both Israelis have a right to exist and Palestinians have a right to exist,” he said.
“I think our job as political parties is to defend the rights of people, not defend the rights of nations.”
Caroline Lucas, the Green Party’s first MP, has meanwhile warned that the proposed policy risks creating a damaging divide.
Lucas told the BBC she had “serious concerns about this motion”.
“There is no single definition of Zionism, and irrespective of the intentions of the people who put that motion forward, I think there is a real risk that it’ll be divisive and could be seen as a sign that Jewish people aren’t welcome in the party,” she said.
“I will not be supporting it for that reason.”
The dispute presents Polanski with a difficult political balancing act: maintaining the Greens’ strong support for Palestinian rights while convincing critics that opposition to Israeli government policy does not become entangled with antisemitic rhetoric or unsupported allegations.
With the party increasingly seeking to translate its surge in support into electoral gains, the conference debate threatens to make questions of Israel, Zionism and antisemitism a defining test of its political identity.
Leave a Comment