I received a request from a good friend asking for my views on the question of whether Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Over the last several months, I’ve posted brief comments on the issue to my Facebook page. A complete response would require more space than any of my friends would likely have the patience to read. But I’ll do my best here to craft a reply of moderate length that explains a few aspects of the question.
In answering a question such as this, the first issue that must be addressed is the definition of the term. In social media, it is common for people to have intense disagreements even though they may ultimately not really disagree simply because they are using different definitions of a term.
The word genocide did not even exist prior to 1944. The term was invented by a Polish-Jewish legal scholar named Raphael Lemkin who used it to describe the Holocaust. Lemkin also reflects on the mass murder of Armenians by the Turks during World War I, and so it should be clear that both events qualify as genocides. In the decade or so following Lemkin’s publication, various definitions have been proffered, and the term has also been given specific legal formulation in various international law codes.
The commonly accepted definition of the term as found in English dictionaries and encyclopedias is: “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group” [source: Merriam-Webster]. The Geneva convention outlawing genocide, enacted on December 9, 1948, defines it as five specific acts “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such.” Lemos, T. M.; Taylor, Tristan S., eds. (2023). The Cambridge World History of Genocide. Vol 1, p. 6.] The five specific acts are: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group.
All this has been debated by many authorities the result of which is that people can and do disagree because they have different understandings of the terminology and conditions.
Let’s see what we can agree on. As I mentioned, it cannot be credibly denied that the Holocaust was a genocide. Strangely enough, despite Lemkin’s own views, there are those who dispute that the massacre of about one million Armenians by the Turks qualifies. The dispute hinges on the question of whether the Turkish actions were motivated by ethnic hatred or had a basis in national defense. Those (including of course the Turks themselves) who deny that that the Armenian massacre was a genocide assert that Turkey had legitimate cause to believe that the Armenians were a threat to their nation and the massacre was therefore a legitimate act of self-defense. One can imagine Nazis making the same justification for the Holocaust. Suffice it to say, I hope, the overwhelming majority of experts reject the Turkish excuse and regard Turkey’s horrendous act as a genocide.
There are those who would try to exonerate the USA from a charge of genocide against Native Americans by asserting that most of the population reduction of natives was the result of natural causes. But that fails, in my opinion, in the light of the scope of American military action and the indisputable fact that among the strategies employed was deliberately placing infected animal carcasses in Native settlements. It seems to me an inescapable conclusion that much of America is territory gained by the genocide of its native inhabitants.
Still, Turkey’s rejection based on a claim of self-defense reveals an important issue for the Gazan conflict. There is no question that Israel was attacked by the ruling party of Gaza on October 7, 2023. Calling the attackers “terrorists” disguises the fact that this was the well-armed and well-trained army of Gaza, backed by thousands of ballistic missiles. This army targeted civilians, and only civilians, slaughtering over 1,200 and taking hundreds captive, sequestering those captives into one of the most elaborate underground tunnel systems ever created.
In the various aspects of the discussion about genocide, it must be noted and considered, because this is what was known to Israel’s population, that the perpetrators of this civilian massacre were intent on the genocide of Israeli Jews. Their slogan, adopted by most other Palestinian groups, is “From the River to the Sea.” While a few Palestinian spokespersons have tried to downplay the meaning of this slogan, it is abundantly clear that those that chant it intend the annihilation of all the Jews of Israel. That is certainly how Israelis understand it. If it is ever officially accused of genocide in the international courts, Israel will likely reply that it is not a genocide to attack those who are planning a genocide against you.
In the question of genocide, scale matters. The Jewish population of Poland in 1939 is estimated at 3.4 million. The Jewish population of Poland in 1945 was about 20,000. The Jewish population of Ukraine in 1939 was about 1.5 million, Ukraine did absorb several hundred thousand Jews fleeing Poland. The Jewish population of Ukraine in 1945 was about 200,000. The combined loss of approximately 90% of the Jews—all civilians—in Poland and Ukraine is what Lemkin was contemplating when he invented the word “genocide” in 1944.
In approximately 100 days during the Spring and Summer of 1994, members of the Hutu ethnic group of Rwanda launched attacks directed primarily at the Tutsi ethnic minority of the country. They murdered an estimated 700,000 people and raped more than a quarter-million Tutsi women. According to the article in Encyclopedia Britannica, the Hutus massacred approximately 70% of the Tutsi population. Few people would dispute using the term genocide for this event.
Population estimates for Gaza on the eve of the war vary from about 1.99M to 2.2M. The population of Gaza as I write this in mid-2026 is 2.14M, or in other words either not changed or perhaps somewhat increased from the beginning of the war. One of the most frequently quoted statistics from the war is the number of Gazan deaths, but as of this date, Gazan authorities have refused to reveal how many of those deaths were those of combatants. Few people would dispute, and certainly I would not dispute, that thousands of children were killed in the hostilities. But unlike the genocides which clearly qualified as such, there is not the slightest evidence that Israeli forces are deliberately trying to kill children. On the other hand, nearly 100% of the thousands of ballistic missiles the Gazan government launched at Israel were aimed at civilian populations. Had Israel not had an effective defense mechanism, the civilian casualties would have been catastrophic, and it is therefore reasonable to describe these missile attacks, in my opinion, as an attempted genocide.
The modern and legal definitions of genocide do not require any particular number or percentage, but it is certainly a rebuttal of any claim of genocide to find that the population of the supposed target of the genocide has not been reduced.
Having said all this, you might imagine that I personally do not believe Israel is guilty of genocide in Gaza, and you would be correct. Nevertheless, I believe that Israel has left itself open to this accusation by unnecessarily continuing the war long after it could have been resolved. There is substantial evidence verified by some of Israel’s own experts that some Israeli forces committed war crimes in Gaza. At one point, Israel embargoed food importation to Gaza, and that could very well have been the basis of an indictment for genocide. Fortunately, the government lifted that embargo after a few weeks. The people of Gaza are no doubt suffering, but they are not starving and they do have access to medical supplies. The current government of Israel includes several members who can be fairly described as “firebrands” who are openly advocating policies that could be described as genocidal. However popular this might make them in some Israeli circles, it is contributing to the worst decline in public opinion of Israel since its establishment as a state.
I hope this article will engender some informed conversation. The thoughts of my friends, in agreement or not, are always welcome.