Jahangir Mohammed argues that Zionism is not merely racism but constitutes extremism under the Government’s definition and is a pathway to violence and terrorism against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims.

Zionism Is an Extremist Ideology Using the UK Government’s 2024 Definition.

The Green Party was due to consider a motion at its party conference to determine whether Zionism is racism, a view most non-Zionists and independent scholars would agree with. We should ask whether it is much more than that. Zionism, as an ideology and in practice, fits the Government’s definition of extremism (as used in the Prevent extremism policy to stop people being drawn into violence and terrorism). Zionism has led to, and continues to justify, terrorism against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims.

In March 2024, the UK government published an updated definition of extremism, which it described as: –

The promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance that aims to:

1. negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others; or
2. undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights; or
3. intentionally create a permissive environment for others to achieve the results in (1) or (2).

Applying this definition rigorously and objectively to Zionism, the political ideology that advocates for and sustains a Jewish supremacist state in Palestine at the expense of the indigenous people, highlights that Zionism meets each criterion in the government’s definition of extremism.

The Ideology Is Based on Violence, Hatred and Intolerance

The UK government’s definition requires that an extremist ideology be “based on violence, hatred or intolerance”. From its inception, Zionism has been fundamentally structured around these elements.

Scholars have argued that Zionism is a path of escalating violence. This is not a peripheral feature of the ideology but a structural element of the Zionist project. A slogan among Zionists in Palestine, “Judea fell by blood and fire, and by blood and fire it will rise again”, encapsulates the violent mindset.

The ideological core of Zionism has been characterised as supremacist and deeply racist. Analysts have noted that “Zionist ideology has an essentially supremacist and deeply racist core.” Joseph Massad, in The Ends of Zionism: Racism and the Palestinian Struggle, argues that Zionism is “constituted in ideology and practice by a religio-racial epistemology” and a “religio-racial epistemology of supremacy over the Palestinian Arabs.”

Israel Shahak, in Jewish History, Jewish Religion, argues that Judaism itself (as interpreted in the Talmud) is “totalitarian and supremacist” and that both secular and religious Zionism are guided by this framework.

Israeli government ministers have publicly articulated this supremacist ideology. Former Prime Minister Golda Meir also famously stated in 1969 that “the Palestinian people do not exist”. In a recent speech, Israel’s Minister of Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, repeated this claim. This is not merely rhetorical provocation but “an explicit expression of a worldview that denies the historical, cultural, and political existence of another nation based on ethnic and religious criteria”. Such statements reflect a core ideological commitment that is fundamentally intolerant of another people’s existence and rights.

Zionism has been described by analysts as combining “ethnic supremacy, theological exceptionalism and colonial entitlement”, with the notion of a “chosen people” elevated above the rest of humanity. This ideological framework, grounded in the supremacy of one group over others, is precisely the kind of intolerance that the UK government’s definition identifies as extremist.

It Aims To Negate Or Destroy The Fundamental Rights And Freedoms Of Others

Another criterion in the UK government’s definition is that an extremist ideology aims to “negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others”. The historical record of Zionism demonstrates a systematic project of denying and destroying fundamental Palestinian historical and human rights.

From its inception, the Zionist project to establish a Jewish state in Palestine has been explicitly colonial. This colonial project has inherently involved the dispossession and displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population, achieved through violence. As one analysis notes, “Zionism is a settler nationalism”. The denial of Palestinian rights is not incidental but foundational to the Zionist project.

The negation of Palestinian fundamental rights is evident across multiple dimensions. Palestinians face daily discrimination, movement restrictions, land confiscation, and systematic violations of their fundamental rights. The denial of the Palestinian right of return, a right enshrined in international law, is explicitly maintained because it would “endanger the ‘Jewish character of the state'”. This prioritisation of the state’s ethno-religious character over the fundamental rights of the indigenous population is exactly the kind of rights-negation that the UK government’s definition identifies as extremist.

UN General Assembly Resolution 3379 (1975) equated Zionism with racism and racial discrimination, and legal analyses have concluded that “the core principle of Jewish supremacy over non-Jews, namely, indigenous Palestinians” resulted in “Zionism qualifying as a form of racial discrimination”. This systematic discrimination against Palestinians constitutes a negation of their fundamental rights.

Furthermore, as one analysis observes, “The essence of the extremism expressed more openly recently, therefore, is not an aberration from mainstream Zionism when it comes to the heart of the Jewish state’s vision of the status of Palestinians; to the contrary, Ben-Gvir articulated the core of the relationship between Jews and Palestinians according to all branches of Zionism currently represented in the Knesset. There is not one Zionist party that presents a vision of a common homeland for both Jews and Palestinians in Israel or in the whole of Palestine. Therefore, it is a stretch to argue that these extreme leaders represent a rupture with Zionism.”

In fact, there is a common thread from the earliest Zionists to today’s leaders, emphasising the denial of Palestinian rights through pressure, force and violence.

Rabbi Yehuda Alkalai (1843): “The redemption will not come about through miracles… but through natural means, and through war and conquest… we must go up to the Land of Israel and take possession of it with might and power.”

Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalischer (1862): “There is no doubt that the Lord will send His salvation, but we must prepare the way by settling the land and waging war against the Ishmaelites [Arabs] who dwell there.”

Rabbi Shmuel Mohilever (1878–1890s): “From all that has been said, it becomes clear to us that the verse ‘And you shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land and dwell in it’ (Bamidbar 33:53) is a positive commandment which is equivalent to all the mitzvot in the Torah. The most important part of this commandment is the dispossession of the inhabitants and possession of the Land…”

Theodor Herzl (June 12, 1895): “We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country… Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”

Theodor Herzl (June 12, 1895):  “We must expropriate gently… the owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”

Ze’ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky (1923): “Zionist colonisation… can proceed and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population – an Iron Wall which the native population cannot break through.”

Ze’ev (Vladimir) Jabotinsky (1923): “Every native population in the world resists colonists.”

It Aims To Undermine Democratic Institutions

The UK government’s definition also includes ideologies that aim to “undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights”. While Zionism operates primarily in the context of Israel/Palestine, its ideological character is anti-democratic because it denies equal rights to all inhabitants of the territory it controls.

Evidence presented to the UK Parliament has demonstrated that “the current Israeli government is increasingly employing non-democratic means whilst promoting authoritarian practices” and “eroding the system of checks and balances…eroding freedoms such as speech, protest and academic freedom”. These are not merely temporary aberrations but reflect the logic of an ideology that privileges one group over others.

Zionism, by its nature, denies equal democratic rights to non-Jewish populations in the territory it controls. The denial of citizenship rights to Palestine’s original population and the maintenance of a system characterised as apartheid are fundamentally incompatible with democratic principles. When an ideology establishes “racial and historical hierarchies, justifying the disregard for the rights of an entire people”, it is inherently anti-democratic.

The political activities of Israel’s intelligence agencies and Zionist supporters of Israel in the UK and US in particular meet one of the examples of undermining democracy.

“Subverting the way public or state institutions exercise their powers, in order to further ideological goals, for example through entryism, or by misusing powers or encouraging others to do so.”

Conclusion: Zionism is Racial Supremacy and Extremism

Applying the UK government’s 2024 definition of extremism to Zionism demonstrates a clear conclusion: Zionism meets all the criteria. It is an ideology based on violence, hatred and intolerance. It aims to negate and destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of Palestinians. It undermines democratic principles by establishing and maintaining a system of ethnic supremacy in Palestine/Israel and by Zionist support groups undermining democracy in the UK to advance and protect the ideology and the interests of a Jewish supremacist state.

The UK government introduced this definition to address “the pervasiveness of extremist ideologies”. A consistent application of this definition requires that Zionism be recognised for what it is: an ideology of extremism that causes profound harm to others. The key to peace, as one Palestinian academic has argued, requires “an end to an ideology”, an ideology that, by the UK government’s own definition, is extremist.