I Used To Say Israel Was Not Committing A Genocide In Gaza
I was Wrong. This is why.
It gives me no pleasure to accuse my country, my friends, and my family of being part of a genocide. I spent months arguing against this. Early in the war, I said that those who accuse Israel of genocide are acting in bad faith and spreading a blood libel. I was right about some of these malevolent actors. But my conclusions were wrong. The seeds of genocide were sown early on. Then Israel escalated its acts against the Palestinian people to a point where I could not stay silent.
My journey to this understanding had several signposts. First, I realized Netanyahu was not running the war in a way conducive to defeating Hamas. Second, I was exposed to the horrific way Israel treated its prisoners in Sde Teiman. Several officials admitted that they lied to me and the press about those conditions. I started wondering what else they were lying about. Then the slaughter of paramedics at close range and the cover-up made me ask further questions. I started looking at things I had avoided. A campaign to bomb all hospitals in Gaza. A move to destroy all clean water sources in the Strip. The routine shooting of children by snipers. The picture became undeniable.
I will do my best to lay out the framework for why I think there is a genocide in Gaza. I hope I get it right. But I can no longer remain silent. I do not want to be complicit in genocide.
Defining Genocide
Before we get started, we have to get our definitions right. The term "genocide" carries immense weight, but its legal definition is precise. Genocide was first recognized as a crime under international law in 1946 by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/96-I). It was subsequently codified in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention). The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has affirmed that the Convention embodies principles of customary international law, binding all states regardless of ratification. No one can commit genocide. It is one of the highest crimes imaginable.
Article II of the Genocide Convention, which is mirrored in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Article 6) and other international statutes, defines genocide as:
"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
This definition contains two crucial elements:
Mental Element: The "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such."
Physical Element: One or more of the five abovementioned acts.
The "intent to destroy" is the most challenging element to prove. It requires demonstrating a specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy the targeted group physically. Cultural destruction or the mere dispersal of a group is insufficient. Case law often associates intent with the existence of a state or organizational plan or policy. The victims of genocide are deliberately targeted because of their membership in a protected group (national, ethnic, racial, or religious), not randomly. The target of destruction must be the group "as such," and genocide can be committed against a substantial and identifiable part of the group, even within a geographically limited area.
Background: The Systematic Denial of Palestinian Existence
The roots of the current conflict run far deeper than recent military operations. At its core lies a fundamental and deliberate attempt to negate the very existence of the Palestinian people as a distinct national, cultural, and political entity.
This denial is not a recent phenomenon but a systematic strategy that has been central to Israel for decades. From the earliest days of Jewish settlement in Palestine, there was a pervasive narrative that portrayed the land as "a land without a people for a people without a land" - a mythological construct that effectively erased the indigenous Palestinian population from historical consciousness.
The strategy of erasure has taken multiple, interconnected forms:
Linguistic and Cultural Negation: Early Zionist settlers and leaders consistently referred to Palestinian Arabs not as a people, but as "Arabs" - a term designed to strip away their specific national identity and historical connection to the land. This rhetorical technique was a powerful tool in denying Palestinian indigeneity and nationhood. That has continued with statements such as the one by Golda Meir that, “There was no such thing as Palestinians... They did not exist." Netanyahu says Israel's goal is to wipe out all possibility of a Palestinian state. Bezalel Smotrich, the Minister of Finance in Israel's government, said, "There is no such thing as a Palestinian nation," "There is no Palestinian history," and "There is no Palestinian language.” The impulse this government has to wipe out Palestinian identity and its presence on the land is palpable and frames its policy in Gaza.
Territorial Fragmentation: Starting in 1967, through a complex system of military orders, administrative controls, and settlement expansion, Israel has systematically fragmented Palestinian territory. The West Bank has been carved into a series of disconnected enclaves, separated by Israeli settlements, military zones, and the separation wall. This physical fragmentation is a deliberate strategy to prevent the emergence of a contiguous Palestinian state.
Legal Mechanisms of Erasure: Israeli legal systems have consistently worked to minimize Palestinian land rights. The Absentee Property Law of 1950, for instance, allowed the state to confiscate land from Palestinians who were displaced during the 1948 war, effectively institutionalizing their dispossession.
Settlement Expansion: The continuous and deliberate expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank is not just a territorial strategy, but a demographic one. These settlements are designed to create physical and political facts on the ground that make a Palestinian state impossible, while simultaneously pushing Palestinians into increasingly smaller and more fragmented areas.
Denial of Political Sovereignty: Israeli political discourse has consistently rejected the possibility of a fully sovereign Palestinian state. Even ostensibly "peace-oriented" plans have proposed limited autonomy, never full statehood. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly and explicitly stated his opposition to a Palestinian state, viewing it as a security threat rather than a legitimate national aspiration.
The ultimate goal of this strategy is clear: to render the Palestinian people invisible, to deny them not just land, but the very right to national existence. This goes beyond a territorial conflict - an attempt to erase a people's historical narrative, cultural identity, and right to self-determination.
The current military operations in Gaza represent the most extreme manifestation of this long-standing strategy of erasure. The scale of destruction, the targeting of civilian infrastructure, and the rhetoric surrounding the conflict all point to an attempt not just to defeat Hamas but to destroy the very possibility of Palestinian collective existence.
The Mental Element: Evidence of Intent
Establishing the "intent to destroy" is the most challenging aspect of proving genocide. Direct evidence of such intent is rare. However, the Genocide Convention does not require a written or explicitly stated plan. Intent can be inferred from various factors, including the scale and nature of the violence, the systematic targeting of a protected group, and, crucially, the rhetoric and policies of political and military leaders.
Statements by Israeli Leaders:
Dehumanizing Language:
Binyamin Netanyahu (Prime Minister, October 25, 2023): "We are the people of the light, they are the people of darkness... we shall realize the prophecy of Isaiah." 1 Critics argue that this statement, framing the conflict in starkly Manichean terms, dehumanizes Palestinians and casts them as inherently evil, making violence against them more palatable.
Advocating Collective Punishment:
Isaac Herzog (President, October 13, 2023): "It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. This rhetoric about civilians not being aware or involved is untrue. They could’ve risen, they could have fought against that evil regime." 2 This statement suggests that the entire Palestinian population is responsible for the actions of Hamas, effectively justifying collective punishment against the civilian population of Gaza, which is a violation of international law.
Yoav Gallant (Minister of Defense, October 9, 2023): "We will end things inside Gaza […]. I have removed all restraints, [you’re allowed to] attack everything, kill those who fight us, whether there is one terrorist or there are hundreds of terrorists, [ordering to attack] through the air, land, with tanks, with bulldozers, by all means, there are no compromises. Gaza will not return to what it was." 3 This statement, made early in the conflict, indicates a willingness to inflict widespread destruction and violence on Gaza, with little regard for civilian life. The removal of "all restraints" suggests a policy of disproportionate force.
Disregard for Civilian Life:
Binyamin Netanyahu (Prime Minister, November 12, 2023): Referring to civilian deaths in Gaza as "collateral damage" 4. Critics argue that this statement, while not explicitly advocating for harm to civilians, minimizes the significance of Palestinian lives lost in the conflict and suggests a lack of concern for the impact of Israeli military operations on the civilian population.
Yoav Gallant (Minister of Defense, November 11, 2023): "I am saying here to the citizens of Lebanon, I already see the citizens in Gaza walking with white flags along the coast... If Hezbollah makes mistakes of this kind, the ones who will pay the price are, first of all, the citizens of Lebanon. What we are doing in Gaza, we know how to do in Beirut." 5 This statement, while directed at Lebanon, can be interpreted as a threat to inflict similar levels of destruction on another civilian population, demonstrating a willingness to cause widespread harm to civilians in pursuit of military objectives.
Known Plans and Policies:
The establishment of a "buffer zone" inside Gaza: Reports indicate that Israel has significantly expanded its footprint in the Gaza Strip since the start of its military operations, creating a "buffer zone" along the border. The UN human rights office has expressed fears that Israel may intend to permanently remove civilians in Gaza as part of this expanded buffer zone. According to a CNN report from April 7, 2025, the Israeli military has transformed every bit of Gazan territory within about half a mile of the Israeli border into a wasteland. Critics argue that this policy demonstrates an intent to permanently alter the borders of Gaza, to displace its population, and to render a significant portion of the territory uninhabitable.
Restrictions on humanitarian aid: The New York Times reported on April 28, 2025, that "No humanitarian aid or commercial goods have been allowed into Gaza since the 2nd of March, which has devastating humanitarian consequences." The UN has also reported on the nearly two-month ban on humanitarian aid entering Gaza, with a UN official stating on April 11, 2025, that the almost two-month prohibition of humanitarian aid and supplies entering Gaza is driving families to the edge of survival. Critics argue that these restrictions are deliberately creating conditions of life that could lead to the physical destruction of the population, violating Article II (c) of the Genocide Convention.
Targeting of civilian infrastructure: The systematic destruction of Gaza's healthcare and water infrastructure has reached catastrophic levels. Israel's attacks on hospitals have pushed the healthcare system to the brink of total collapse, with 31 out of 36 hospitals damaged or destroyed. The destruction of Al-Shifa Hospital, Gaza's largest medical complex, epitomizes this devastation. After a military raid, the hospital was reduced to ruins, leaving it entirely out of service. Dozens of bodies were found at the site, and the medical facility was effectively obliterated.
The water infrastructure has suffered equally severe damage. More than 80 percent of water and sanitation infrastructure across the Gaza Strip has been wholly or partially destroyed. Hundreds of water and sanitation facilities have been damaged, rendering the basic life-sustaining systems nearly non-functional. The cost of damage to critical infrastructure is estimated at around $18.5 billion. The remaining water system is on the verge of collapse, with desalination plants losing up to 85% of their drinking water production capacity. Severe water shortages have reached critical levels, affecting thousands of civilians.
These widespread attacks on hospitals, water treatment facilities, and essential infrastructure raise serious concerns about the intentionality of the destruction and its compliance with international humanitarian law. The scale and systematic nature of the infrastructure collapse suggest a deliberate strategy to undermine the basic survival capabilities of Gaza's civilian population. The goal appears to be, circumstantially at least, to make life unlivable in Gaza. That involves the killing of many people through disease, lack of sustenance, bombing, and lack of medical attention.
The Physical Element: Acts on the Ground
While establishing intent is crucial, the Genocide Convention also requires evidence of specific physical acts committed with that intent. In the case of Gaza, the following actions constitute the physical element of the alleged genocide:
Bombing of Humanitarian Areas: The repeated bombing of areas designated as humanitarian zones, including refugee camps, schools, and UN facilities, raises serious questions about Israel's adherence to the principles of distinction and proportionality under international law. These attacks, which have resulted in the deaths of countless civilians, suggest a deliberate targeting of the very places where displaced people seek refuge.
Loosening of Protection of Civilians from Bombing: As documented by The New York Times, Israel loosened its rules of engagement, increasing the number of civilians who could be endangered in each airstrike. This policy change has led to a dramatic increase in civilian casualties, with devastating consequences for the population of Gaza. The decision to prioritize military objectives over the protection of civilian lives is a clear violation of international humanitarian law.
Starvation of the Population: The imposition of a near-total blockade on Gaza, preventing the entry of food, medicine, and other essential supplies, has created a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented scale. The UN has warned of widespread starvation and malnutrition, particularly among children. Deliberately depriving a civilian population of the means of survival is a grave violation of international law and a key element of genocide as defined by Article II (c) of the Genocide Convention.
Deprivation of Fresh Water: The destruction of water infrastructure and the restriction of access to clean water have further exacerbated the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. With limited access to safe drinking water, the population is at increased risk of disease and dehydration. This deliberate deprivation of a basic necessity of life contributes to the conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction.
Destruction of Hospitals: As detailed in the UN Human Rights Office report, Israel's attacks on hospitals have decimated the healthcare system in Gaza, leaving the population with limited access to medical care. The destruction of hospitals, the killing of medical personnel, and the denial of medical access to the wounded all constitute acts aimed at undermining the physical survival of the group.
Kill Zones: Reports have emerged of the establishment of "kill zones" in Gaza, where Israeli forces allegedly target civilians. These reports, which are still being investigated, suggest a deliberate policy of targeting civilians who venture into specific areas, further contributing to the climate of fear and violence.
Snipers Shooting Children: There have been numerous reports and documented cases of Israeli snipers shooting children in Gaza. These acts, which appear to be deliberate and indiscriminate, raise serious concerns about the targeting of the most vulnerable members of the population.
These actions, taken together, paint a grim picture of the reality on the ground in Gaza. While Israel may argue that these actions are necessary for its security, the scale and nature of the violence, combined with the evidence of intent outlined above, suggest a different and far more sinister motive: the destruction, in whole or in part, of the Palestinian population of Gaza.
Dolus Specialis: Proving Specific Intent in the Genocide of Palestinians
The concept of dolus specialis - the specific intent to destroy a group - is the most challenging element to prove in a genocide case. In the context of the Palestinian experience, this particular intent becomes critically apparent through the systematic and long-standing strategy of erasure detailed in the previous section.
Dolus specialis requires more than harmful actions; it demands proof of a deliberate intent to destroy a group "in whole or in part." In this case, the purpose is not merely demonstrated by recent military actions, but by a decades-long systematic attempt to eliminate Palestinian nationhood, identity, and potential for self-determination.
The evidence of specific intent can be parsed into several key dimensions:
Ideological Intent: The foundational Zionist narrative that consistently denied Palestinian indigeneity demonstrates a long-standing intent to eliminate the Palestinians as a distinct national group. This goes beyond military strategy - it is a fundamental rejection of Palestinian existence as a legitimate collective identity.
Territorial Elimination: The fragmentation of Palestinian territory is not an accidental consequence of conflict, but a deliberate strategy to make Palestinian statehood impossible. By systematically breaking Palestinian land into non-contiguous enclaves, Israel has sought to destroy the territorial basis of Palestinian national identity.
Cultural Destruction: The ongoing attempts to suppress Palestinian historical narrative, language, and cultural institutions represent an effort to eliminate the group's collective memory and identity - a key component of genocide as defined by international law.
Demographic Engineering: Settlement expansion and displacement policies are not random acts, but calculated attempts to alter the demographic composition of territories, effectively working to eliminate the Palestinian population's ability to maintain its collective existence.
Recent Military Actions: The current military operations in Gaza represent the most extreme manifestation of this long-standing intent. The scale of destruction goes far beyond legitimate military objectives, suggesting a broader intent to destroy the Palestinian population "in whole or in part."
The legal standard for dolus specialis does not require proof of a formal, written destruction plan. Instead, it can be inferred from:
Patterns of conduct
Systematic destruction of the group
Rhetoric of political leaders
Policies that demonstrate a consistent intent to eliminate the group's existence
In this case, the evidence suggests a specific intent that extends beyond the current conflict - a deliberate, long-term strategy to prevent Palestinians from existing as a national, cultural, and political entity.
The destruction is not just physical, but existential. It is an attempt to destroy Palestinians "as such" - the precise language used in the Genocide Convention. This goes to the heart of dolus specialis: the intent to destroy a group's capacity for collective existence.
The current military operations in Gaza can thus be seen not as an isolated conflict, but as the most violent expression of a decades-long project of elimination. The specific intent is clear: to ensure that Palestinians cannot exist as a people with the right to self-determination, to a homeland, to a future.
Connecting the Mental and Physical Elements of Genocide
To prove that genocide is taking place, we need to prove that there is a connection between the mental motives and the actions on the ground. I believe there is a robust connection. This is why.
Dehumanizing language and loosened rules of engagement: When Palestinians are consistently referred to as "the people of darkness," as Netanyahu stated, it becomes easier to justify violence against them. This rhetoric may contribute to a lowered threshold for civilian casualties, as soldiers and policymakers may view Palestinian lives as less valuable. This is evidenced by a New York Times investigation, which revealed that Israel loosened its rules of engagement to bomb Hamas fighters, now allowing officers to endanger up to 20 civilians in each airstrike. This change, implemented immediately after the October 7th attacks, led to a drastic increase in civilian deaths, with over 15,000 Palestinians killed in the first two months of the war. The Times investigation found that Israel severely weakened its system of safeguards meant to protect civilians; adopted flawed methods to find targets and assess the risk of civilian casualties; routinely failed to conduct post-strike reviews of civilian harm or punish officers for wrongdoing; and ignored warnings from within its ranks and from senior U.S. military officials about these failings. This direct link between dehumanizing rhetoric and policy changes that increased civilian casualties underscores the dangerous consequences of framing an entire population as the enemy.
Advocating collective punishment and restrictions on humanitarian aid: When President Herzog says that "it's an entire nation out there that is responsible," it creates a justification for policies that punish the entire population of Gaza. This can be directly linked to the restrictions on humanitarian aid. If the whole population is deemed responsible, then depriving them of food, water, and medicine can be considered a legitimate form of collective punishment. The nearly two-month ban on humanitarian aid, as reported by The New York Times, created a desperate situation in Gaza, pushing families to the brink of survival.
Disregard for civilian life and the targeting of civilian infrastructure: Gallant's statement about removing "all restraints" and attacking "everything" in Gaza suggests a willingness to inflict widespread destruction, irrespective of civilian presence. This rhetoric can be seen as contributing to targeting civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools, and residential buildings. A report published by the UN Human Rights Office on December 31, 2024, found that Israel’s pattern of deadly attacks on and near hospitals in Gaza, and associated combat, pushed the healthcare system to the brink of total collapse. The report documented at least 136 strikes on at least 27 hospitals and 12 other medical facilities between October 7, 2023, and June 30, 2024, resulting in significant casualties among doctors, nurses, medics, and other civilians and causing considerable damage, if not destruction of civilian infrastructure. The report further noted that in March 2024, the Israeli military raided Al Shifa Medical Complex a second time, leaving it in complete ruin by April 1. After the withdrawal by the Israeli army, three mass graves were reportedly found at the hospital, with at least 80 corpses retrieved, raising serious concerns that crimes under international law may have been committed. The destruction of such vital infrastructure undermines the ability of the civilian population to survive, creating conditions of life that could lead to their physical destruction, as prohibited by the Genocide Convention.
The establishment of a "buffer zone" and forced displacement: The creation of a "buffer zone" inside Gaza, as reported by CNN, is another example of how rhetoric can translate into action. The UN human rights office has expressed fears that Israel may intend to permanently remove civilians in Gaza as part of this expanded buffer zone. This policy, combined with the rhetoric of disregard for civilian life, suggests a deliberate effort to displace the population and alter the demographic makeup of Gaza.
It is crucial to recognize that these connections are not merely coincidental. The rhetoric of Israeli leaders creates a permissive environment for actions that harm the Palestinian population of Gaza. By dehumanizing Palestinians, advocating for collective punishment, and expressing disregard for civilian life, these leaders are normalizing and legitimizing policies and actions that could constitute the physical elements of genocide.
Addressing Reasonable Doubt and Alternative Explanations
In any legal analysis involving a charge as grave as genocide, it is essential to address the concept of "reasonable doubt" and consider alternative explanations for the actions in question. To secure a conviction for genocide, a court must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused possessed the specific intent to destroy the targeted group.
The primary alternative explanation offered for Israel's actions in Gaza is that legitimate security concerns drive them. Proponents of this view argue that Israel is acting in self-defense against Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization that has repeatedly launched attacks against Israeli civilians. They would claim that the military operations are aimed at dismantling Hamas's infrastructure, preventing future attacks, and ensuring the safety of Israeli citizens. They might also argue that civilian casualties are a tragic but unavoidable consequence of urban warfare, where Hamas deliberately embeds itself within the civilian population, using them as human shields.
However, this "security" explanation is undermined by several key factors:
The IDF's Military Strategy: The Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) military strategy in Gaza has not been focused on taking over and governing the Gaza Strip population centers, nor on replacing Hamas with an alternative governing structure. Despite the extensive military operations, there has been no clear "day after" plan articulated by the Israeli government, nor any effort to establish an alternative to Hamas's rule. This suggests that the primary objective is not to create a more secure or stable environment for either Israelis or Palestinians, but rather to inflict maximum damage on Hamas and, by extension, the Gaza population.
Maintaining Hamas's Power: The current situation, where Hamas remains in power while the Gazan population suffers, is arguably counterproductive to Israel's long-term security interests. By not addressing the underlying political and economic grievances that fuel support for Hamas, Israel risks perpetuating a cycle of violence and instability. Critics argue that the current approach effectively keeps Hamas in power while harming the very population that Israel claims to be protecting.
Attempts to Implement Trump's Plan: Reports indicate that Israel has attempted to put elements of former U.S. President Donald Trump's "Deal of the Century" plan into practice. This plan, which was widely criticized by Palestinians and the international community, envisioned a significantly reduced and fragmented Palestinian state, with Israel maintaining control over key areas of the West Bank and Jerusalem. Critics argue that Israel is using the current conflict as an opportunity to implement further this plan, which would involve the permanent displacement of Palestinians and the annexation of Palestinian territory.
Taken together, these factors cast serious doubt on the "security" explanation for Israel's actions in Gaza. While it is undeniable that Israel faces legitimate security threats, the nature and scale of its military operations, combined with the absence of a clear political strategy and the reported attempts to implement elements of Trump's plan, suggest a broader intent beyond mere self-defense.
The question, then, is whether the evidence presented – the dehumanizing rhetoric, the loosened rules of engagement, the restrictions on humanitarian aid, the targeting of civilian infrastructure, and the strategic context – is sufficient to overcome reasonable doubt and establish the specific intent to destroy the Palestinian population of Gaza, in whole or in part.
Conclusion: A Call for Accountability and Action
The evidence presented in this document represents more than an academic exercise. It is a moral imperative that demands immediate and decisive action from the international community, particularly those closest to this conflict.
The time has come for a fundamental reassessment of international support for Israel's military actions. Specifically, this means:
Immediate Arms Embargo: Countries supplying arms to Israel, particularly the United States, must immediately cease all military aid and weapons sales. The continued provision of weapons that are being used to commit potential war crimes and acts of genocide makes these nations complicit in the destruction of Palestinian lives.
Targeted Sanctions: Comprehensive economic sanctions should be considered against Israel, targeting key political and military leaders responsible for the ongoing violence. These sanctions should create meaningful pressure to change the current action and bring accountability.
International Criminal Court Prosecution: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant must be investigated and potentially prosecuted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and potential genocide. The evidence compiled in this document provides a substantial basis for such an investigation.
A Special Responsibility for Jews and Israelis
Perhaps the most crucial call to action falls to Jews and Israelis themselves. The Jewish people, with their history of genocide and persecution, have a unique and profound moral responsibility to speak out against these actions. The "Never Again" principle cannot be a selective commitment – it must apply to all human beings, regardless of nationality or ethnicity.
Jewish communities around the world must recognize that the actions of the Israeli government do not represent the values of Judaism, nor the memory of those who have suffered persecution. Silence is complicity. Active opposition is a moral imperative.
To Jewish and Israeli individuals:
Speak out within your communities
Support organizations working for Palestinian rights
Challenge the narrative of dehumanization
Demand accountability from your political leaders
Recognize that proper security can only come through mutual understanding and respect, not through destruction
This is not about choosing sides between Israelis and Palestinians. This concerns upholding fundamental human rights, international law, and our shared humanity.
The world is watching. History will judge the actions of those who commit these potential atrocities and those who could stop them and remain silent.
The time for action is now. Stop the genocide.