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

Both sidesSays it is contestedSources conflict

Sources such as the UN Commission of Inquiry and Genocide Watch conclude Israel is committing genocide, while Israel and allied sources (e.g., AJC, JNS) reject the allegation.

Whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contentious global dispute with profound legal, historical, and geopolitical implications.

Legally, genocide is defined under the 1948 UN Genocide Convention as committing specific acts—such as killing members of a group or deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction—with the "specific intent" (dolus specialis) to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

Currently, there is no international consensus on this question. Instead, the issue is being actively litigated at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Below is an overview of the ongoing legal proceedings, the arguments supporting the accusation, and the arguments defending Israel's actions.

1. The Legal Status at the International Court of Justice (ICJ)

In December 2023, South Africa formally instituted proceedings against Israel at the ICJ, accusing it of violating the Genocide Convention.

•No Final Verdict Yet: The ICJ has not yet made a final determination on the merits of whether Israel’s actions constitute genocide. In May 2026, the ICJ established a timeline for subsequent written pleadings that extends through May 2029 (giving South Africa until late 2027 to reply to Israel's defense and Israel until mid-2029 to file its rejoinder). A final legal verdict on the merits is expected to take several years.

•Provisional Measures: In January 2024, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling finding it "plausible" that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza under the Genocide Convention were at risk. It issued legally binding "provisional measures" ordering Israel to take all steps within its power to prevent genocidal acts, prevent and punish incitement to genocide, and ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid. The ICJ did not, however, order a unilateral ceasefire.

2. Arguments That Israel’s Actions Constitute Genocide

Those who argue that Israel is committing genocide—including South Africa, numerous human rights organizations, and several international bodies—point to the following evidence:

•Mass Scale of Destruction and Casualties: Proponents of this view emphasize the immense humanitarian toll. By mid-2026, local health authorities in Gaza reported that more than 70,000 Palestinians had been killed and over 170,000 injured, a substantial portion of whom were women and children. They point to the near-total destruction of housing, hospitals, universities, and water infrastructure, making life in Gaza unlivable.

•The "Conditions of Life" and Starvation: Human rights groups and international observers accuse Israel of using starvation and the denial of basic necessities (water, medicine, fuel, electricity) as a method of warfare. They argue that severely restricting aid and systematically destroying agricultural land and bakeries constitute "deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s physical destruction".

•Demonstration of "Genocidal Intent": Legal experts accusing Israel point to statements made by high-ranking Israeli civilian and military officials. Rhetoric referencing biblical destruction (such as "Amalek"), calling Gaza a place where "there will be no electricity, no food, no fuel," and referring to adversaries as "human animals" are cited as proof of dolus specialis (specific intent) to destroy the Palestinian population.

•Findings by UN Bodies: In September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory issued a comprehensive report concluding that Israel is actively committing genocide in Gaza. Subsequent reports from the Commission in 2026 reaffirmed these findings, accusing Israeli forces of deliberately targeting the demographic future of the territory, including children.

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

Israel, supported by allies such as the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom, strongly rejects the allegation of genocide, labeling it "baseless," "scandalous," and a distortion of international law. Their defense rests on several key arguments:

•The Right to Self-Defense: Israel contends that its military operations were launched as a direct and legitimate act of self-defense following the October 7, 2023, attacks led by Hamas. The attacks resulted in the deaths of approximately 1,200 people (primarily civilians) and the abduction of hundreds of hostages.

•Targeting a Terrorist Group, Not a Population: Israel argues that its military objective is solely to dismantle the military and governing capabilities of Hamas—which is recognized as a terrorist organization by Israel, the US, the EU, and others—and to free the hostages. It maintains that it does not possess the specific intent to destroy the Palestinian people.

•The Use of "Human Shields" by Hamas: Defenders argue that the high number of civilian casualties is a tragic consequence of urban warfare exacerbated by Hamas's tactics. They assert that Hamas systematically embeds its fighters, rocket launchers, and command centers within civilian infrastructure, such as residential buildings, schools, mosques, and hospitals, effectively using Gazan civilians as human shields.

•Mitigating Civilian Harm: Israel points to the measures its military takes to reduce civilian casualties, such as dropping leaflets, broadcasting radio alerts, and sending text messages to warn civilians to evacuate combat zones before strikes occur. They also point to efforts to facilitate the entry of humanitarian aid, arguing that shortages are caused by Hamas hijacking aid or UN logistical failures rather than an Israeli policy of starvation.

•The High Legal Standard of Intent: Allies of Israel argue that the term "genocide" is being weaponized politically. They maintain that the legal threshold of proving a systematic intent to eradicate an entire group is not met, as Israel’s military directives and operational goals do not aim to destroy Palestinians as an ethnic or national group.

Conclusion

Whether the conflict constitutes a genocide remains a deep international division. To many human rights organizations, legal scholars, and several UN-mandated bodies, the scale of death and deprivation in Gaza meets the legal definition of a genocidal campaign. To Israel and its key allies, the war is a tragic but legally justified defense against an existential terrorist threat. The ultimate legal determination of these claims rests with the International Court of Justice, which will not deliver a final judgment for several years.

Citations (13)

1mg.co.zaNews and media
mg.co.za
Backs: “Whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contentious global dispute with profound legal, historical, and geopolitical implications.”
background, article, neutral. Claim: The question of whether Israel's actions in Gaza constitute genocide is a highly contentious global dispute.
2jns.orgNews and mediaquality 0.78
jns.org
Backs: “Whether Israel’s military actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023, constitute a genocide is a highly contentious global dispute with profound legal, historical, and geopolitical implications.”
background, article, neutral. Claim: The question of whether Israel's actions in Gaza constitute genocide is a highly contentious global dispute.
3ajc.orgNonprofits and think tanks
ajc.org
Backs: “Legally, genocide is defined under the 1948 UN Genocide Convention as committing specific acts—such as killing members of a group or deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction—with the "specific intent" (dolus specialis) to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,…”
background, article, neutral. Claim: Genocide is defined under the 1948 Convention by specific acts committed with specific intent to destroy a protected group.
4genocidewatch.comNonprofits and think tanks
genocidewatch.com
Backs: “Legally, genocide is defined under the 1948 UN Genocide Convention as committing specific acts—such as killing members of a group or deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction—with the "specific intent" (dolus specialis) to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,…”
background, article, neutral. Claim: Genocide is defined under the 1948 Convention by specific acts committed with specific intent to destroy a protected group.
5middleeasteye.netNews and mediaquality 0.79
middleeasteye.net
Backs: “In December 2023, South Africa formally instituted proceedings against Israel at the ICJ, accusing it of violating the Genocide Convention. No Final Verdict Yet: The ICJ has not yet made a final determination on the merits of whether Israel’s actions constitute genocide.”
evidence, article, neutral. Claim: South Africa instituted ICJ proceedings against Israel in December 2023, accusing it of violating the Genocide Convention.
6thepresidency.gov.zaGovernment
thepresidency.gov.za
Backs: “In May 2026, the ICJ established a timeline for subsequent written pleadings that extends through May 2029 (giving South Africa until late 2027 to reply to Israel's defense and Israel until mid-2029 to file its rejoinder). A final legal verdict on the merits is expected to take several years.”
evidence, official document, neutral. Claim: The ICJ set a pleadings timeline through May 2029, so no final verdict on the merits is expected for years.
7wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “Provisional Measures: In January 2024, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling finding it "plausible" that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza under the Genocide Convention were at risk. It issued legally binding "provisional measures" ordering Israel to take all steps within its power to prevent genocidal acts, prevent…”
evidence, reference entry, neutral. Claim: In January 2024 the ICJ found plausible rights at risk and issued provisional measures, without ordering a ceasefire.
8aa.com.trNews and mediaquality 0.61
aa.com.tr
Backs: “By mid-2026, local health authorities in Gaza reported that more than 70,000 Palestinians had been killed and over 170,000 injured, a substantial portion of whom were women and children. They point to the near-total destruction of housing, hospitals, universities, and water infrastructure, making life in Gaza…”
statistic, article, points to yes. Claim: Gaza health authorities reported over 70,000 Palestinians killed and over 170,000 injured, many women and children.
9ohchr.orgNot yet classified
ohchr.org
Backs: “They argue that severely restricting aid and systematically destroying agricultural land and bakeries constitute "deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s physical destruction". Demonstration of "Genocidal Intent": Legal experts accusing Israel point to statements made by…”
evidence, official document, points to yes. Claim: Restricting aid and destroying agricultural land and bakeries are argued to constitute inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy the group.
10wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “Findings by UN Bodies: In September 2025, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory issued a comprehensive report concluding that Israel is actively committing genocide in Gaza. Subsequent reports from the Commission in 2026 reaffirmed these findings, accusing Israeli…”
attribution, reference entry, points to yes. Claim: The UN Commission of Inquiry concluded in September 2025 that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
11ohchr.orgNot yet classified
ohchr.org
Backs: “Subsequent reports from the Commission in 2026 reaffirmed these findings, accusing Israeli forces of deliberately targeting the demographic future of the territory, including children. ---. 3. Arguments That Israel’s Actions Do Not Constitute Genocide”
attribution, official document, points to yes. Claim: 2026 Commission reports reaffirmed the genocide findings, accusing Israeli forces of targeting children and the territory's demographic future.
12wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “Subsequent reports from the Commission in 2026 reaffirmed these findings, accusing Israeli forces of deliberately targeting the demographic future of the territory, including children. ---. 3. Arguments That Israel’s Actions Do Not Constitute Genocide”
attribution, reference entry, points to yes. Claim: 2026 Commission reports reaffirmed the genocide findings, accusing Israeli forces of targeting children and the territory's demographic future.
13al-monitor.comNot yet classified
al-monitor.com
Backs: “Israel, supported by allies such as the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom, strongly rejects the allegation of genocide, labeling it "baseless," "scandalous," and a distortion of international law. Their defense rests on several key arguments:”
attribution, article, points to no. Claim: Israel and allies including the US, Germany and the UK reject the genocide allegation as baseless and a distortion of international law.