This week, I would like to revisit the Gaza conflict. I recently debated a friend about whether the Israeli Defense Forces’ actions, while certainly war crimes, rose to the level of genocide, and I must admit, she changed my mind.
As part of my research, I read an article titled “5 Reasons Why the Events in Gaza Are Not “Genocide” by the American Jewish Committee. The AJC’s first reason is Israel’s objective is the elimination of Hamas and hostage rescue, not the destruction of Gazans simply because they are Palestinian.
While this may be many Israeli citizens’ intentions, I don’t believe this is the Israeli government’s primary goal. Too many members of the current ruling coalition have been on the record advocating for policies involving the forced removal of Gazans and the resettlement of the Gaza Strip for me to believe they do not have ulterior motives. We, of all countries, should understand we cannot always believe staged press conferences.
Their second reason is since Hamas committed a “genocidal attack” on Israel, Israel’s response cannot be genocide. This is a logical fallacy. While Oct. 7 was a heinous terrorist attack, and I do believe Hamas would commit genocide if they had the means, the Oct 7 attack was not a genocide. Even if it was, that does not automatically make Israel’s response non-genocidal, and it certainly does not excuse the IDF from being bound to international law or basic morality.
The AJC’s third reason is Israel’s actions demonstrate due care for civilian life. I don’t believe this is true due to multiple allegations surrounding IDF conduct. IDF soldiers have reported officers were allowed to authorize attacks that endangered up to 20 civilians just to kill one combatant. While the rules of engagement have presumably been tightened since, the acceptable ratio is likely still large.
Additionally, numerous Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians have reported the IDF’s use of human shields when clearing buildings or tunnels. These civilians would be used to check for combatants or explosives. Some soldiers described the practice as “ubiquitous,” with numerous units having their own Palestinian shield, according to the Associated Press.
Finally, estimates put the death toll at 55,000 to 65,000. The Office of the DNI estimated there were originally 20,000 to 30,000 Hamas fighters with 16,000 to 18,000 remaining. If we assume 25,000 fighters, 17,000 who remain, and a low-ball casualty estimate of 55,000, 6/7ths of the fatalities were civilians. Accounting for smaller groups like Islamic Jihad and some fresh recruits, the fraction could maybe be 3/4ths at best.
Number four is “Hamas’ actions are designed to cause harm to Palestinian civilians and blame Israel.” This is another logical fallacy. While this statement is true, it does not absolve Israel of genocide claims. Anyone familiar with international law or morality knows the enemy’s use of human shields or similar tactics does not simply allow you to kill the civilians. Different methods, which often put soldiers at higher risk, must be used.
Their last claim is information is often unreliable. While I originally did not trust Gazan-provided casualty estimates, it has been corroborated via other methods. Furthermore, Israel has not provided a reliable, official estimate of its own. Additionally, while Hamas undoubtedly caused some civilian casualties, the rough proportion attributed to Israel can be estimated from the ratio of firepower used by both sides.
So why should you care? I would love to make some fancy argument about how it relates to economics, but that’s not why I care. You should care because every one of those dead civilians – whether they were infants or the elderly; journalists or doctors; anti-Hamas, indifferent or even pro-Hamas – deserved to live, since they were civilians, not combatants. That is what both the law and any decent moral belief system prescribes.
