The word “genocide” holds tremendous moral and emotional weight, yet may not always be appropriate when discussing Israel’s conflict against Gaza.
First off, genocide doesn’t refer to killing and destroying all members of a population group; moreover, there are better terms available to describe its devastation.
Humanitarian Law
Israel as a signatory to the Genocide Convention must uphold international humanitarian law. According to this treaty, states are bound to “respect and ensure the safety and protection of civilian populations affected by armed conflict,” while humanitarian organizations enjoy broad discretion when proposing assistance and protection actions for vulnerable civilian populations.
Adila Hassim, a South African lawyer appearing before the International Criminal Court (ICJ), claimed in her opening statement at the ICJ that Israel is engaging in genocide against Palestinians by targeting Gaza’s civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools and universities; these attacks, according to Hassim, had led to bodily harm for Palestinians as well as dehydration and starvation resulting in physical injury, dehydration and starvation for many Palestinians living there.
Israel’s actions also show mens rea, or intent, which can often be difficult to prove in genocide cases, according to she said that Israeli leaders openly support the idea that Palestinians should be destroyed, she noted that Law for Palestine had collected over 500 statements made by Israeli officials calling for genocide against Palestinians in order to provide further proof.
Capacity vs. Intent
Israel contends that Hamas’ terrorist attacks of October 7 compelled it to defend its citizens, yet this defense includes massive bombing, killing, and destruction of life-support infrastructure, according to experts examining this case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Jehad Abusalim, Executive Director of the Jerusalem Fund; Raz Segal, an Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Stockton University; and Hannah Bruinsma, Legal Advisor with Law for Palestine all strongly denounced Israel’s military strategy as genocide in progress. They provided examples of incitement to genocide including calls for another Nakba as well as weaponry with inherently indiscriminate impact to demonstrate this thesis.
According to the genocide convention, states can only be accused of genocide when they possess the capacity for all five acts that comprise this crime: killing members of a group; inflicting serious physical or psychological harm upon them; and deliberately inflicting conditions designed to bring about their physical destruction. Israel strives to minimize civilian harm; however it cannot do so completely in densely populated Gaza where civilians live together with soldiers in camps. Panelists agreed.
Legality vs. Morality
As human suffering continues to dominate headlines and social media feeds, calls for accountability arise – but these calls may be misdirected.
The International Court of Justice will soon reach its verdict, after recruiting some of South Africa’s finest legal minds to argue Israel violated the Genocide Convention. Judges could issue an binding preliminary order compelling Israel to stop its military campaign in Gaza.
Of course, that would be hugely significant; however, any court ruling on this topic likely wouldn’t make much difference to what actually transpires in reality.
Israel insists its war in Gaza is solely against Hamas and not against Palestinian civilians; even if that were true, that wouldn’t constitute genocide under international law; attacks on legitimate targets can potentially cause civilian harm if there’s enough likelihood that any expected military gain outweighs it; this has certainly been seen with Israel’s actions towards Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
International Law
Genocide requires proof of intent, which must be established to the court. But it would be incorrect to accuse Israel of genocide solely based on statements by politicians; its military is an organized force operating according to Cabinet decisions and specific directives; they do not change their plans of action based on random political rhetoric.
Comparing Israel’s war against Hamas to the Nazi Holocaust is an insulting misrepresentation of history, since modern-day Israel was established after 6 million Jews were massacred under Nazi rule during World War II. Employing Holocaust as a tool against Israel should be condemned; I participated in a panel discussion about this topic today on this subject – see video above for my contribution.
To know more about recent developments, visit our Alts news website. Thankyou!
- Friday Intraday Trading Sees Nvidia’s stock Market Cap Momentarily Cross $2 Trillion
- Trump’s January 6 Civil Cases Proceed While Criminal Case Is Halted
- Trump Delivers Speech at the Columbia Black Conservative Federation Gala
- Trump Declares Strong Support for IVF Following Alabama Supreme Court Decision
- Schumer in Ukraine Declares US Backing During House Aid Standoff
