Key Takeaways
- Leaked messages from a private WhatsApp group used by UK Green Party members contained explicit calls for the elimination of Zionism, including statements that “Zionism has to go” and that the speaker would like Israel “wiped off the map.”
- Participants described British Jews as a “brilliant weapon for the Israeli state” and suggested that Jewish activism in the UK serves Israeli interests by enabling accusations of antisemitism.
- Several individuals holding official party positions—such as the membership officer for Global Majority Greens and a parish councillor—actively participated in, promoted, or endorsed the extremist rhetoric.
- The Green Party’s leadership declined to comment on the grounds that the WhatsApp group was not an “official” channel, a stance criticized by Jewish advocacy organisations as insufficient.
- Campaign Against Antisemitism and the Board of Deputies of British Jews warned that the rhetoric could constitute criminal incitement and urged the party to suspend, investigate, and expel those involved.
- The controversy highlights a growing tension within the Green Party between anti‑imperialist activism and the need to uphold standards against hate speech and antisemitism.
Background of the Leaked WhatsApp Group
The whistle‑blowed material originates from a private WhatsApp chat named Greens Against Imperialism, created by Sophus Magill, a Green Party parish councillor representing Wootton Bridge on the Isle of Wight. Although the group was not an official party forum, it was routinely used by members and activists to coordinate campaigning, draft conference motions, and discuss foreign‑policy issues. The leak, obtained by The Times, revealed a series of exchanges spanning June through August 2026 in which participants debated the legitimacy of Zionism, the state of Israel, and the role of British Jews in the broader Middle‑East conflict. The informal nature of the chat did not diminish its influence; several contributors held formal roles within the party’s specialist wings, giving their views a degree of institutional weight.
Content of the Extremist Remarks
In a July exchange, Magill asserted that “Zionism has to go, it’s ultimately an apartheidal, ethnosupremacist ideology” and, when pressed for practical implications, declared that the only acceptable solution was “one equal state.” When a fellow member asked whether this amounted to wanting Israel “wiped off the map,” Magill replied unequivocally, “Yes, I would like that,” adding later that wanting an “illegitimate apartheid state gone from all maps” was not violent, likening it to the historical disappearance of Rhodesia. The conversation later veered into justifications for violence, with one participant arguing that an extreme anti‑Zionist stance could entail supporting the killing of Zionists and claiming such a view was “not specifically racist any more than believing in capital punishment for traitors.” These remarks collectively reveal a willingness to entertain, if not outright advocate, lethal action against those identified as Zionists.
Statements on British Jews as a Weapon
Beyond anti‑Zionist rhetoric, the chat contained overtly antisemitic tropes concerning British Jews. In June, an unnamed member wrote, “I think a lot of British Jews have been heavily exposed to the propaganda… British Jews are a brilliant weapon for the Israeli state to help with the use of antisemitism as a justification in the UK, one of their strong allies.” The comment insinuated that Jewish Britons act as covert agents of Israel, using accusations of antisemitism to shield Israeli policies. Another participant, identified by the initials “AT” and later linked to activist Ashley Tubb, echoed similar sentiments, framing British Jewish engagement with Israel as a tool for propagating state propaganda. Such language reproduces classic conspiracy narratives that allege dual loyalty and covert influence, contributing to a hostile environment for Jewish constituents within the party.
Involvement of Party Officials
The leaked logs demonstrate that individuals holding formal organisational roles were not passive observers but active contributors. Animah Kosai, the membership officer for Global Majority Greens—a special interest group that includes deputy leader Mothin Ali—used the group to solicit support for conference preparations and to promote Motion A3, titled “Zionism is Racism.” Kosai encouraged members to become co‑proposers, noting her own limited capacity to sponsor additional motions. Magill, the group’s founder and a parish councillor, initiated many of the most inflammatory statements, while Tubb, who had stood for election to the Green Party’s campaigns committee, defended Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a “national liberation movement” and blamed American and Zionist forces for protests against the Iranian regime. Their participation underscores how extremist discourse permeated layers of the party’s internal structure.
Responses from Green Party Leadership
When approached by The Times for comment, Magill, Tubb, and Kosai did not dispute the authenticity of the messages. A Green Party spokesperson offered a generic statement: “We do not comment on internal party forums or discussions on WhatsApp groups that are not official party group channels.” This deflection drew sharp criticism from external observers, who argued that the party cannot disavow responsibility simply because the chat was unofficial, especially given that its creator was an elected councillor and that several participants held official posts. The leadership’s reluctance to engage directly with the content raised concerns about the party’s commitment to confronting hate speech within its ranks.
Condemnation from Jewish Advocacy Groups
Campaign Against Antisemitism issued a stern warning, labeling the messages “utterly repugnant” and suggesting that certain posts might constitute criminal offences under UK law. The organisation’s lawyers were reportedly reviewing the exchanges for potential prosecution, noting the disturbing allusion to a “vehicular mass‑casualty attack on British Jews.” Similarly, the Board of Deputies of British Jews emphasized that the rhetoric “lowers the threshold for intimidation and violence against Jews in Britain” and urged the Green Party to suspend those involved, launch an urgent investigation, and expel anyone found to have advocated violence or antisemitic hatred. Both groups called for concrete disciplinary action rather than vague assurances.
Implications for Party Discipline and Public Trust
The affair places the Green Party at a crossroads between its progressive, anti‑imperialist identity and the imperative to maintain a zero‑tolerance stance toward hate speech. Allowing extremist rhetoric to fester in unofficial channels risks alienating Jewish voters, undermining the party’s broad‑based appeal, and exposing it to legal liability. Moreover, the episode may embolden fringe elements within the party’s broader left‑wing milieu, signalling that inflammatory language can be expressed without consequence. To restore credibility, the party leadership likely needs to adopt transparent investigative procedures, enforce existing codes of conduct, and communicate a clear message that antisemitic or violent rhetoric—regardless of the platform—will not be tolerated.
Conclusion and Outlook
The leaked WhatsApp exchanges expose a troubling undercurrent of antisemitic and violent rhetoric among certain UK Green Party activists, including individuals holding official responsibilities. While the party has framed the discussion as a private matter unrelated to its official functions, the involvement of elected officials and the public nature of the statements necessitate a robust response. Jewish advocacy organisations have demanded accountability, warning that inaction could translate into real‑world harm. How the Green Party addresses this controversy will test its ability to reconcile fervent anti‑imperialist activism with the universal rejection of racism and hatred, shaping its reputation and electoral prospects in the months ahead.