Unveiling the Facts: Genocide Accusations Against Israel

At the end of August, a surprising development occurred when the International Association of Genocide Scholars pronounced a resolution concerning the events taking place in Gaza. The bold claim was made that the actions and policies of Israel fall within the category of genocide as per Article II of the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948). Furthermore, it argued that these were indicative of war crimes and transgressions against human rights, as per the international humanitarian laws and the terms set by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The credibility of the International Association of Genocide Scholars’ resolution becomes questionable when we acknowledge, as their own site admits, that not all, and perhaps a minority of its members, are genuine specialists in the field of genocide. If the veracity of the membership of this group is in doubt, how can we have faith that their adjudications regarding genocide are accurate and just, considering that genocide is the most severe accusation one can level against a nation?

The criticism of genocide against Israel isn’t fresh—it’s a claim that’s been voiced ever since its ground operations against Hamas were launched, a group that’s backed by Iran and operates out of Gaza. On October 7, 2023, extremists invaded Israel, leading to the loss of 1,200 lives and kidnapping of 251 individuals, mostly non-combatants. Following this harrowing period, the Israel Defense Forces intervened in Gaza seeking to incapacitate Hamas’ ability to wage war and govern, and most importantly, to rescue the hostages.

After a challenging period of nearly 23 months, the IDF made considerable strides in weakening Hamas and managed to retrieve 203 hostages, 148 of which were still alive. Forty-eight individuals, both alive and deceased, are still being held by Hamas. By autumn 2023, the charge of genocide against Israel had lost its novelty. Having been used both by Palestinians and left-leaning intellectuals and students for close to four decades, dating back to the First Intifada that began in 1987, the term had almost become a constant.

At the Durban Conference Against Racism, facilitated by the UN in 2001, delegates endorsed a statement that accused Israel of transgressions including ‘war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing’. During the mid-2000s, certain Palestinians, along with scholars specializing in the Middle East, suggested that Israel’s actions that could be characterized as genocide dated back to 1948. This was the time when the newly formed nation successfully fought off five Arab armies that sought to eliminate it.

Operations such as Operation Cast Lead that lasted for three weeks in December 2008-January 2009, and Operation Protective Edge that spanned seven weeks in the summer of 2014, also provoked charges of genocide. In 2023, South Africa presented a case to the International Court of Justice asserting that Israel was engaging in genocide in Gaza. A provisional ruling from the ICJ deemed South Africa’s claim ‘plausible’.

However, in the almost four-decade period since the First Intifada began and accusations of genocide against Israel became commonplace, the population of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza grew significantly faster than that of any large nation in the Western world. In 1987, their population ranged from 1.5 to 1.8 million, but it has since tripled to around 5 million or more. Despite this, detractors continue to label Israel as promoting genocide.

One reason to doubt such claims is the neglect of the legal definition of genocide. Genocide, contrary to what critics often insinuate, doesn’t merely involve a high civilian death count. It refers to intentional killings with a very specific purpose: the ‘intent to destroy’ a people or a substantial portion thereof. Critics highlight statements uttered by Israeli officials during moments of great distress or the fiery opinions of government leaders from the religious ultra-nationalist fringe, but they rarely try to prove the most critical elements of a genocide charge.

Namely, they fail to demonstrate that the IDF’s rules of engagement in Gaza are aimed at annihilating the Palestinians, wholly or partly, simply for being Palestinians. Another reason to remain skeptical of their claims is their tendency to ignore solid evidence and instead rely on knee-jerk emotional responses, emotionally charged images, and well-crafted propaganda.

The detractors make serious allegations that Israel deliberately starved the population of Gaza, that the IDF slaughtered civilians on purpose, and that the Israeli Air Force carried out indiscriminate bombings, failing to separate between combatants and non-combatants and launching disproportionate strikes. However, upon thorough examination, it appears that these allegations are unsubstantiated.

A thorough investigation discloses several key insights. Misguided allegations that Israel deliberately caused starvation among the civilian population of Gaza till March 25th, 2025, are indeed based on ‘false assumptions,’ ‘inaccurate information,’ and ‘erroneous data’. That being said, without downplaying Israel’s military considerations, the authors unequivocally criticize the decision to suspend aid to Gaza from the end of March to late May 2025.

An ongoing disregard for Hamas’s stated objectives and tactics unjustly shifts the blame for the devastation in Gaza from the jihadists to Israel. Consistent with its own admissions, Hamas routinely uses Gazan civilians as ‘human shields’ to deliberately increase casualties and consequently escalate international pressure on Israel.

Hamas employs civilian infrastructures such as homes, hospitals, and schools to store weapons, launch rockets, house militants, and set up operational bases. Furthermore, the jihadists wear civilian clothing to blend into the population in areas designated as ‘safer’ or in humanitarian zones.

There is no credible evidence to support the notion that Israel adopted a policy to deliberately target civilian populations. However, a thorough examination of the allegations against Israel does reveal civilian casualties that may be legally classified as war crimes. These are typical of military conflicts, especially when waged in densely populated urban areas.

Nevertheless, the IDF has taken numerous unprecedented steps to reduce ‘collateral damage’, often at a substantial cost to its own strategic advantage. In addition, the casualty data released by Hamas’ Gaza Ministry of Health is fundamentally flawed. Originating from a group committed to Israel’s destruction, these numbers combine both combatant and non-combatant deaths and rely heavily on dubious media coverage to exaggerate the number of women and children killed.

Finally, UN agencies, human rights organizations, and scholars are consistently inaccurate in their reporting of Palestinian casualties and Israeli operations. Driven by a ‘humanitarian bias’ they often accept ‘alarmist reports’ concerning Palestinians. They do not have the resources to accurately distinguish between non-combatant and combatant casualties in a society under the authoritarian rule of Hamas. Countering the unfounded and damaging genocide charges against Israel is vital, both to preserve Israel’s right to self-defense and to prevent the devaluation of the crime of genocide in a world where resurgent authoritarian powers are all too willing to commit the most atrocious of crimes.