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

Whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contested legal, political, and moral question with no universal consensus.

While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization.

The primary international forum for resolving this question is the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

1. The ICJ Case and Legal Proceedings

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

•Provisional Measures: The ICJ has issued several orders directing Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide, including facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid. However, these "provisional measures" did not constitute a ruling on the merits of whether genocide was actually occurring.

•Procedural Timeline: The case is a lengthy legal process. In March 2026, Israel filed its formal "Counter-Memorial," which included objections to the court's jurisdiction. The ICJ subsequently set a deadline of November 2027 for South Africa to reply, and May 2029 for Israel to submit its rejoinder. A final ruling on the merits of the case is not expected for several years.

•Third-Party Interventions: Several countries have formally intervened in the case. Nations like Ireland and Namibia have filed interventions arguing for broader interpretations of genocidal intent to support South Africa’s case. Conversely, countries like the United States, Hungary, and Fiji have intervened in support of Israel, arguing that the court must maintain a very high legal threshold to infer genocidal intent.

2. Arguments That Israel’s Actions Constitute Genocide

Those who argue that Israel is committing genocide—including various UN bodies, human rights organizations, and legal experts—base their case on the scale of the destruction and the actions of the Israeli military.

•UN Commission of Inquiry Findings: In September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel released a report concluding that Israel is actively committing genocide. The commission concluded that Israeli forces committed four of the five acts defined by the Genocide Convention: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm; deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction; and imposing measures intended to prevent births.

•Targeting of Children and Infrastructure: In June 2026, the commission highlighted the high volume of child casualties (documenting over 20,000 children killed in Gaza) as further evidence of genocidal intent. Critics of Israel's campaign point to the systematic destruction of hospitals, universities, residential areas, and agricultural land, as well as the displacement of over 80% of Gaza's population.

•Blockade and Starvation: Organizations like Amnesty International argue that Israel’s strict blockade on food, water, medical supplies, and fuel is a deliberate attempt to inflict conditions of life calculated to destroy the group in whole or in part.

•Genocidal Intent (Dulus Specialis): UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese (in reports such as "Anatomy of a Genocide" in 2024 and "Gaza Genocide: a collective crime" in 2025) argued that statements made by senior Israeli officials—including comparisons to biblical enemies and descriptions of Gazans as a collective threat—provide direct evidence of an intent to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza.

3. Arguments Rejecting the Accusation of Genocide

Israel, its legal representatives, and its international allies strongly reject the accusation of genocide, arguing that the claim is legally baseless and politically motivated.

•The Right to Self-Defense and Counter-Terrorism: In its ICJ filings, Israel has argued that its military operations are legitimate acts of self-defense launched in response to the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023. Israel maintains that its strategic objective is the destruction of the military and governing capabilities of Hamas—which is designated as a terrorist organization by Israel, the US, and the EU—and the rescue of hostages, not the destruction of the Palestinian people.

•Lack of Genocidal Intent: Opponents of the genocide label argue that the legal definition of genocide requires specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy a group. They contend that Israel's actions do not show this intent. Supporters point to Israel’s efforts to warn civilians to evacuate combat zones via leaflets, phone calls, and safe zones, and the facilitation of some humanitarian aid (even if contested) as proof that there is no plan to physically destroy the population.

•Jus in Bello vs. Genocide: Legal experts who reject the genocide accusation argue that while the civilian death toll and humanitarian crisis in Gaza are devastating, they represent the tragic realities of urban warfare where combatants operate within civilian infrastructure. They argue that even if certain military actions violate international humanitarian law (constituting potential war crimes or crimes against humanity), they do not meet the exceptionally high threshold required to prove the specific crime of genocide.

Conclusion

The question of whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza constitute genocide is one of the most polarizing issues in modern international law. To date, several UN-appointed independent commissions and human rights organizations have declared that they believe a genocide is taking place. Conversely, Israel and its allies maintain that the war is a legitimate, defensive conflict against a terrorist organization, which does not meet the legal threshold of genocide. The definitive international legal ruling on this matter will ultimately be decided by the ICJ, a process that will take several years.

Citations (12)

1reliefweb.intGovernment
reliefweb.int
Backs: “While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization.”
2ohchr.orgNot yet classified
ohchr.org
Backs: “While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization.”
3amnesty.orgNonprofits and think tanks
amnesty.org
Backs: “While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization.”
4thepresidency.gov.zaGovernment
thepresidency.gov.za
Backs: “While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization. The primary international forum for resolving this question is…”
5jurist.orgNews and media
jurist.org
Backs: “While multiple international bodies, human rights organizations, and legal scholars have argued that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, the Israeli government, its allies, and other legal experts strongly reject this characterization. The primary international forum for resolving this question is…”
6jns.orgNews and mediaquality 0.78
jns.org
Backs: “The primary international forum for resolving this question is the International Court of Justice (ICJ).”
7wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “The ICJ Case and Legal Proceedings. In December 2023, South Africa formally instituted proceedings against Israel at the ICJ, alleging violations of the 1948 Genocide Convention. Provisional Measures: The ICJ has issued several orders directing Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide,…”
8asil.orgNonprofits and think tanks
asil.org
Backs: “Provisional Measures: The ICJ has issued several orders directing Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent acts of genocide, including facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid. However, these "provisional measures" did not constitute a ruling on the merits of whether genocide was actually occurring.”
9wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “UN Commission of Inquiry Findings: In September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel released a report concluding that Israel is actively committing genocide. The commission concluded that Israeli forces committed four of the five acts defined by…”
10youtube.comSocial media and video
youtube.com
Backs: “Targeting of Children and Infrastructure: In June 2026, the commission highlighted the high volume of child casualties (documenting over 20,000 children killed in Gaza) as further evidence of genocidal intent. Critics of Israel's campaign point to the systematic destruction of hospitals, universities, residential…”
11law4palestine.orgNot yet classified
law4palestine.org
Backs: “Blockade and Starvation: Organizations like Amnesty International argue that Israel’s strict blockade on food, water, medical supplies, and fuel is a deliberate attempt to inflict conditions of life calculated to destroy the group in whole or in part. Genocidal”
12unwatch.orgNot yet classified
unwatch.org
Backs: “Supporters point to Israel’s efforts to warn civilians to evacuate combat zones via leaflets, phone calls, and safe zones, and the facilitation of some humanitarian aid (even if contested) as proof that there is no plan to physically destroy the population. Jus in Bello vs. Genocide: Legal experts who reject the…”