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

This question involves contested legal claims — I'll survey the genocide definition, court proceedings and competing assessments since October 7.

Israel's military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023 have been widely accused of constituting genocide, but whether they legally meet the definition remains contested and has not been finally adjudicated by the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

1. Legal definition

The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". The five acts are:

> (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part

Genocide requires special intent (dolus specialis); it is carried out deliberately. The standard is exceptionally high for proving specific genocidal intent, and the Court has long held that where intent is inferred from conduct, it must be "the only reasonable inference".

Article II requires a protected group, at least one prohibited act, and an intention to destroy the group as such.

2. Background

The war erupted on October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants invaded Israel. Around 1,200 people were brutally murdered, most of them civilians, and 251 were dragged into Gaza as hostages. Israeli tallies cite 1,200 people killed and 251 hostages.

Since then, authorities in the Gaza Strip, under Hamas control, have reported about 74,250 Palestinians killed by the offensive launched after October 7, 2023. Gaza's Health Ministry said the toll had risen to 74,016 people, with 175,068 wounded.

3. The case at the International Court of Justice

South Africa filed a case against Israel at the ICJ in December 2023 alleging violations of the Genocide Convention.

In its order of 26 January 2024, the ICJ did not decide the merits. It found that the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide was plausible, requiring binding provisional measures and also described as the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts under the Genocide Convention was plausible.

The Court issued three sets of provisional measures in January, March and May 2024, requiring Israel to take "all measures within its power" to prevent genocide, ensure its military refrains from prohibited acts, punish incitement, allow humanitarian assistance, preserve evidence and submit compliance reports. This included taking all measures within its power to prevent acts within Article II in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, and in May 2024 ordering Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah, maintain open humanitarian corridors, and allow UN investigative bodies access to Gaza.

The Court found prima facie jurisdiction and standing, but these interim orders do not constitute a final finding that Israel has committed genocide. The Court has not delivered a final judgment on the genocide allegation, and no final ruling on the merits—whether genocide occurred—has been made. The case is expected to take years to decide.

4. Conclusions by UN bodies and human rights organizations that Israel is committing genocide

Several independent commissions and NGOs have concluded that the threshold is met:

These conclusions typically rely on inferring intent from patterns such as high death tolls, destruction of health and food systems, blockade and statements by Israeli officials, including the "complete siege" announcement.

5. Israel's position

Israel fervently denies that its military campaign amounts to a breach of the Genocide Convention. It acknowledged "also tragic and agonizing civilian casualties in this war. These realities are the painful result of intensive armed hostilities that Israel did not start and did not want".

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly denied allegations of genocide, underscoring the October 7 attack as justification and emphasizing the country's right to defend itself.

At the ICJ, Israel rejected accusations as baseless, said South Africa was acting as a mouthpiece for Hamas, and said its military actions are acts of self-defense against Hamas and other terrorist organisations. Israel has argued its operations in Rafah were self-defence and called South Africa's case a "distortion of reality". Its Foreign Ministry has called genocide claims "entirely based on Hamas' campaign of lies" and says actions are justified as self defence.

Israel maintains it "does not intend for the civilian population to suffer" and "did everything we could to minimize the number of casualties".

6. Position of other governments

The United States government has said it does not consider the war to be genocide. National security adviser Jake Sullivan said "We do not believe what is happening in Gaza is a genocide", a position reiterated as "We do not believe that what is happening in Gaza is genocide".

7. Summary of status

There is no international judicial consensus that Israel's actions constitute genocide:

Determination under international law ultimately requires proof of specific intent to destroy the protected group in whole or in part, which remains the central point of legal and political dispute.