Do Israel's military actions in Gaza since October 7th, 2023 constitute a genocide?

The question of whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contentious, deeply polarized issue. There is currently no final, formal legal determination by a body such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the international community, legal experts, and human rights organizations remain sharply divided.

The arguments, perspectives, and current legal standings surrounding this issue involve several distinct viewpoints.

1. The Legal Status (The ICJ Case)

In December 2023, South Africa formally instituted proceedings against Israel at the ICJ under the 1948 Genocide Convention.

•Provisional Measures: In January 2024, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling finding it "plausible" that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from genocide were at risk. The court ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide, prevent and punish incitement to genocide, and ensure the delivery of basic services and humanitarian aid. Subsequent provisional orders were issued throughout 2024.

•Timeline for a Final Ruling: The ICJ has not yet ruled on the merits of the case (i.e., whether genocide is actually taking place). Legal proceedings of this nature take years. The ICJ set a deadline of November 22, 2027, for South Africa to file its reply to Israel's defense, and May 22, 2029, for Israel to submit its rejoinder, meaning a final ruling on the accusation of genocide is not expected for several years.

2. Arguments That Israel's Actions Constitute Genocide

Those who argue that Israel is committing genocide—including the South African government, human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, various United Nations experts, and a significant portion of genocide and Holocaust studies scholars—point to several key factors:

•Scale of Destruction and Casualties: Proponents of this view emphasize the immense loss of life (with tens of thousands of Palestinians killed, a large percentage of whom are women and children) and the widespread destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure, which they argue has made Gaza functionally uninhabitable.

•Deprivation of Essentials (The Siege): Critics point to severe restrictions on the entry of food, water, medical supplies, and fuel into Gaza. They argue that the resulting starvation, dehydration, and collapse of the healthcare system are deliberate actions designed to bring about the physical destruction of the population.

•Statements of Intent: Legal scholars advocating this position argue that the required legal threshold of "genocidal intent" (dolus specialis) can be inferred. They cite dehumanizing rhetoric used by some high-ranking Israeli politicians and military leaders, arguing these statements reflect a systematic goal to destroy the Palestinian community in Gaza, in whole or in part.

•Academic Consensus: In August 2025, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS)—the largest academic body in the field—passed a resolution formally declaring that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza.

3. Arguments That Israel's Actions Do Not Constitute Genocide

Israel, its major allies (such as the United States), and several international law and military experts strongly reject the genocide accusation, describing it as baseless and a distortion of international law. Their defense rests on the following points:

•Self-Defense Against a Terrorist Organization: Israel asserts that its military campaign is a legitimate exercise of self-defense following the October 7, 2023, attacks led by Hamas, which killed approximately 1,200 people. They argue that the military's objective is the eradication of Hamas's military and governing capabilities and the rescue of hostages, not the destruction of the Palestinian people.

•Lack of Genocidal Intent: Opponents of the designation emphasize that the legal definition of genocide requires a specific intent to destroy a group. They argue that tragic civilian casualties are a consequence of high-intensity urban warfare, rather than a planned, systematic attempt to eliminate Palestinians. They view controversial political statements as rhetoric directed at Hamas, rather than the general population.

•Hamas's Use of Human Shields: Israel argues that civilian casualties are high because Hamas deliberately embeds its fighters, rocket launchers, and tunnels within densely populated civilian areas, including schools, mosques, and hospitals, using civilians as human shields.

•Mitigation Efforts: Proponents of this view point to the measures the Israeli military has taken to minimize civilian harm, such as issuing evacuation warnings, dropping flyers, making phone calls to civilians in target zones, and establishing humanitarian corridors, actions they argue are incompatible with genocidal intent.

Summary

Ultimately, whether Israel's actions constitute genocide is a complex legal and historical debate.

•To critics and several international bodies, the scale of destruction, civilian death toll, siege tactics, and official rhetoric provide compelling evidence of genocidal intent and action.

•To Israel and its supporters, the war is a lawful and necessary campaign of self-defense against an armed group embedded in a civilian population, and they argue that the high civilian death toll is an unfortunate reality of urban combat rather than a targeted effort at destruction.

The definitive legal ruling on this matter remains under active, multi-year deliberation by the International Court of Justice.

Citations (10)

1wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “The question of whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contentious, deeply polarized issue. There is currently no final, formal legal determination by a body such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the international community, legal experts, and…”
2uwa.edu.auAcademic
uwa.edu.au
Backs: “There is currently no final, formal legal determination by a body such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the international community, legal experts, and human rights organizations remain sharply divided.”
3jns.orgNews and mediaquality 0.78
jns.org
Backs: “There is currently no final, formal legal determination by a body such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the international community, legal experts, and human rights organizations remain sharply divided.”
4wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “In December 2023, South Africa formally instituted proceedings against Israel at the ICJ under the 1948 Genocide Convention.”
5amnesty.orgNonprofits and think tanks
amnesty.org
Backs: “Provisional Measures: In January 2024, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling finding it "plausible" that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from genocide were at risk. The court ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide, prevent and punish incitement to genocide,…”
6thepresidency.gov.zaGovernment
thepresidency.gov.za
Backs: “The ICJ set a deadline of November 22, 2027, for South Africa to file its reply to Israel's defense, and May 22, 2029, for Israel to submit its rejoinder, meaning a final ruling on the accusation of genocide is not expected for several years.”
7newsweek.comNews and mediaquality 0.82
newsweek.com
Backs: “Those who argue that Israel is committing genocide—including the South African government, human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, various United Nations experts, and a significant portion of genocide and Holocaust studies scholars—point to several key factors: Scale”
8youtube.comSocial media and video
youtube.com
Backs: “Those who argue that Israel is committing genocide—including the South African government, human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, various United Nations experts, and a significant portion of genocide and Holocaust studies scholars—point to several key factors: Scale”
9dirco.gov.zaGovernment
dirco.gov.za
Backs: “Scale of Destruction and Casualties: Proponents of this view emphasize the immense loss of life (with tens of thousands of Palestinians killed, a large percentage of whom are women and children) and the widespread destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure, which they argue has made Gaza functionally…”
10pbs.orgNews and mediaquality 0.87
pbs.org
Backs: “Deprivation of Essentials (The Siege): Critics point to severe restrictions on the entry of food, water, medical supplies, and fuel into Gaza. They argue that the resulting starvation, dehydration, and collapse of the healthcare system are deliberate actions designed to bring about the physical destruction of the…”