Talk:List of genocides/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

RFC - Inclusion of Gaza genocide

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should Gaza genocide be included in this list? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Survey

• Don't include unless the title is changed to "alleged genocides" or similar. In my view, inclusion under the current title amounts to a statement in wikivoice that a genocide is occurring. Regardless of what the majority view is, we should avoid such statements in cases where there's significant (non-fringe) controversy. I know there have been attempts to qualify such implied statements with prose like "recognized in significant scholarship", but that doesn't fully address the issue, just as false advertising can't be remedied by adding fine print. The non-neutral (implied) statement is still there. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 22:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

  Many (most?) entries in the list have been controversial, see Genocide recognition politics. The United States[1] (and others[2]) deny Rohingya genocide. The United Nations[3] (and others[4]) deny Darfur genocide. Most of those who are denying Gaza genocide would also dispute the longstanding Sabra and Shatila massacre entry in this list.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 00:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include there are a lot of reliable sources calling it genocide or saying in so many words that Israel is engaging in genocidal actions. Most of the sources that disagree with that label are either simply unreliable or directly tied to Israel and its backers. If this situation was applied to an enemy of the US, like China or Russia, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Dronebogus (talk) 02:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

  If this situation was applied to an enemy of the US, like China or Russia, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

  That's not true. For example, Persecution of Uyghurs in China and Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russo-Ukrainian War are not included in the list. BilledMammal (talk) 04:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

  I think there is sufficient sourcing to call China’s actions against the Uyghurs genocide of some description, at least. Dronebogus (talk) 04:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

  You may think, but editors' consensus was different.[5] — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

  I see a lot of reasonable votes supporting the genocide label. There was zero consensus; the change was basically by admin fiat, implemented to sidestep the issue in a reasonable and policy-based way. “Genocide” will always be a controversial label, especially when it’s in a country that is heavily involved in international geopolitics Dronebogus (talk) 11:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

• Don't include, per xDanielx. Sourcing is not sufficient yet to put it in Wikivoice per the recent RM - and generally, we should wait to do so until after the ICJ has ruled, at which point we can either make it clear that the allegations were true or that they were false. BilledMammal (talk) 04:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

  Wiki policy depends on RS, not ICJ. And most entries in this list don't have an ICJ ruling.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 00:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Don't include per XDanielx. Right now the status of a genocide is disputed, and really entries to this article should only be made when it's clearer. — Czello ^(music) 09:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
• Don't include. This article "only considers acts which are recognised in significant scholarship as genocides", and this case is obviously an extremely controversial topic right now, the allegations could be false as well. We should wait and see how things develop. HaOfa (talk) 15:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  Based on that criteria, then Gaza should be included, as in the currently published scholarship, it is overwhelmingly described as a genocide. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 21:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  No, it's not. For example, the Economist: "Charging Israel with genocide makes a mockery of the ICJ... it diverts attention from the real humanitarian crisis in Gaza". https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/18/charging-israel-with-genocide-makes-a-mockery-of-the-icj HaOfa (talk) 11:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  I'm not sure I follow, this isn't a scholarly article—blindlynx 11:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  @האופה the Economist is not a scholarly publication, try again. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 14:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  Serious publications and scholars need time to analyze the evidence and provide their verdicts. Those who have already drawn conclusions while the war is still ongoing, despite many leading outlets and world leaders directly stating this is a fabrication, should be questioned. Claims of genocide have often been made during Israeli operations in Gaza all over the past decade by activists, so there are lots of good reason to doubt their credibility. HaOfa (talk) 17:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  So your answer is to call for us to use the opinions of non-experts over experts in the field, including multiple pre-eminent experts? You really are an ideologically-blinkered editor in these matters. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  There is a time delay (particularly due to selection bias and publication delay) for assessing scholarly consensus. The events here are too recent to assess scholarly consensus in full. — MarkH₂₁^talk 21:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

  Wikipedia has an ongoing, general problem of automatically treating academic sources as reliable. General-audience publications such as the Economist are actually significantly more reliable than publications in ideologically captured fields like critical race theory, postcolonial studies, etc. Partofthemachine (talk) 05:05, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

  I disagree with both points - scholarly consensus over time is the gold standard. However, the recency means it is difficult to assess academic consensus here anyways. — MarkH₂₁^talk 21:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

  On the contrary, academics and subject matter experts are far more reliable in cases like this which require specialised analysis, whereas random columnists for general audience sources may not know what they're talking about or allow their personal opinions to inform their takes. Or are we saying that The Economist has more credibility than preeminent experts like Schabas and Moreno Ocampo on what a genocide looks like? TRCRF22 (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

  This claim is based on the presumption that all or most of these academics actually know anything about anything, which is not the case. For example, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, which is one of the most prominently referenced sources for the claim that Israel is committing genocide, also believes that not allowed transgender women to compete in women's sports is a form of genocide. Partofthemachine (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

  Correction: it believes that such bans are "driven by genocidal ideology", not that trans people are literally experiencing genocide. But even if they did believe that, it does not follow that most academics "don't know anything about anything" just because one academic body has one opinion that you disagree with. Plenty of general-audience publications have put forward some pretty fringe opinions too. TRCRF22 (talk) 21:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) That NGO isn't an academic institution. Furthermore, anything self-published by them isn't an academic source either.

  Judging academic consensus looks at academic books and journal articles, assessing them as a whole with appropriate weighting for the most prominent and reliable individual sources. — MarkH₂₁^talk 21:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

  Pretty sure Omer Bartov and Raz Segal may know something about genocide. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 10:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Partofthemachine That's not how any of this works. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 10:53, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include. Historical events are always subject to debate, and violent events are routinely challenged and contested, especially by the minoroty aligned with or sympathetic to the presumed perpetrator(s). However, this page is not titled List of unchallenged genocides (it would probably be blank in such an instance). Where the majority of reliable sources agree, or where there's evidence of a very high quality (e.g., the UN or multiple subject experts), then it would be a violation of NPOV to let minority opinions dictate Wikipedia content. This is precisely the situation with Gaza genocide. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
• Include: this is not a list of officially UN-recognised genocides or anything according to that metric, henceforth the inclusion of so many events in the article including Yazidi, Osage Indian murders, Rohingya, Genocide of Acholi and Lango people, Guatemala etc I could go on. The article is literally called Gaza genocide too. It is a list of genocide or genocidal-like massacres that are recognised as such by vast sways of scholars and non-governmental organisations etc. - the only reason for not including it is due to personal bias or else we need to have a discussion about the entire page. Additionally as per Kashmiri. Ecpiandy (talk) 00:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
• Don't include, per xDanielx. The allegations of genocide in Gaza are obviously contested (according to many they are totally made up), and lack consensus. Adding such a controversial claim would violate our neutrality guidelines. O.maximov (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  according to many they are totally made up Just who is this mysterious "many"? Selfstudier (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• Include: per above. Even Al Jazeera, which is declared generally reliable on WP:RSPS, covers the coverage of the subject. Sufficient evidence of genocide will be essential in history. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Read the first line of the article "This list of genocides includes estimates of all deaths which were directly or indirectly caused by genocides that are recognised in significant scholarship as genocides; overwhelming scholarship recognises this as genocide. We articulated this point well when discussing the ultimately successful name change to Gaza genocide. Ecpiandy (talk) 00:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• Comment — Could anyone claiming that significant scholarship consistently endorses the view that a genocide is occuring in Gaza provide examples of such scholarship? DecafPotato (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

  {{Expert opinions in the Gaza genocide debate}} was created for this purpose. Here it is:

Scholarly and expert opinions on the Gaza genocide

Sources Name Month Profession Source Example statement (English or autotranslated and verified) Simplified position Notes Segal 13 October 2023 Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies Jewish Currents "A Textbook Case of Genocide" Yes Already in article 800 scholars 15 October 2023 Various scholars, most of whom in relevant fields. TWAILR journal website "we are compelled to sound the alarm about the possibility of the crime of genocide being perpetrated by Israeli forces against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.", "Language used by Israeli political and military figures appears to reproduce rhetoric and tropes associated with genocide and incitement to genocide.", "Evidence of incitement to genocide has also been present in Israeli public discourse." Maybe Already in article Signatories include Mohamed Adhikari and Taner Akçam Zarni 16 October 2023 Genocide scholar The Jakarta Post "As if to spit on the post-Holocaust moral clarion call of “never again”, Israel, a signatory to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, has in effect declared its intention to commit an act of genocide by cutting off all “water, electricity, and food supplies” to the 2.2 million people in Gaza." Yes Already in article Genocide Watch 17 October 2023 Antigenocide NGO Genocide Watch "This settler ideology is supported by Likud, the party of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is committed to further settlement expansion. Like the American ideology of "manifest destiny," this settler ideology is used to justify forced displacement of Palestinians who have lived in the occupied territories for thousands of years.", "Dehumanization of the enemy is common in wars and genocides. It is already evident in this war, with Hamas militants spitting on and mutilating bodies of their victims and the Israeli Defence Minister calling Hamas "human animals." Dehumanization is a stage of genocide.", "Genocide Watch considers the war in Israel and Gaza to be at Stage 3: Discrimination, Stage 4: Dehumanization, Stage 5: Organization, Stage 6: Polarization, Stage 8: Persecution, and Stage 9: Extermination." Maybe Already in article Fassin 18 October 2023 Anthropologist and sociologist Le Monde "La directrice exécutive de Jewish Voice for Peace a lancé un vibrant « plaidoyer juif », appelant à « se dresser contre l'acte de génocide d'Israël ». Couper l'eau, l'électricité et le gaz, interrompre l'approvisionnement en nourriture et envoyer des missiles sur les marchés où les habitants tentent de se ravitailler, bombarder des ambulances et des hôpitaux déjà privés de tout ce qui leur permet de fonctionner, tuer des médecins et leur famille : la conjonction du siège total, des frappes aériennes et bientôt des troupes au sol condamne à mort un très grand nombre de civils – par les armes, la faim et la soif, le défaut de soins aux malades et aux blessés." [The executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace has issued a vibrant "Jewish plea," calling for "standing up against Israel's act of genocide." Cutting off water, electricity and gas, interrupting food supplies and sending missiles into markets where residents are trying to get supplies, bombing ambulances and hospitals already deprived of everything that allows them to function, killing doctors and their families: the combination of total siege, airstrikes and soon ground troops is condemning a very large number of civilians to death – by weapons, hunger and thirst, and the failure to care for the sick and wounded.], "Du premier génocide du XXe siècle, celui des Herero, en 1904, mené par l'armée allemande en Afrique australe, qui, selon les estimations, a provoqué 100 000 morts de déshydratation et de dénutrition, au génocide des juifs d'Europe et à celui des Tutsi, la non-reconnaissance de la qualité d'êtres humains à ceux qu'on veut éliminer et leur assimilation à des animaux a été le prélude aux pires violences." [From the first genocide of the 20th century, that of the Herero in 1904, carried out by the German army in southern Africa, which, according to estimates, caused 100,000 deaths from dehydration and malnutrition, to the genocide of the Jews of Europe and that of the Tutsi, the non-recognition of the quality of human beings of those who are to be eliminated and their assimilation to animals has been the prelude to the worst violence.] Yes Illouz 18 October 2023 Professor of sociology Le Monde "military response … against an enemy which has violated borders and international law, … is not genocide" No No longer in article Buljusmic-Kastura 19 October 2023 Genocide researcher Al Jazeera "[Dehumanizing rhetoric] is horrifying and it all leads us to where we are at right now, which is the fact that what is happening in Gaza is a genocide." Yes Not in article UN Special Rapporteurs 19 October 2023 Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, Special Rapporteur on Violence against women and girls, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights ""We are sounding the alarm: There is an ongoing campaign by Israel resulting in crimes against humanity in Gaza. Considering statements made by Israeli political leaders and their allies, accompanied by military action in Gaza and escalation of arrests and killing in the West Bank, there is also a risk of genocide against the Palestinian People," the experts said." Maybe Center for Constitutional Rights 19 October 2023 legal advocacy organization The Intercept "Katherine Gallagher, senior attorney with CCR and a legal representative for victims in the pending ICC investigation in Palestine, told The Intercept. "U.S. officials can be held responsible for their failure to prevent Israel's unfolding genocide, as well as for their complicity, by encouraging it and materially supporting it."" Yes Already in article; There is then also the CCR's full 44-page briefing declaring it genocide and naming the US as a complicit party (not in article). Dana 29 October 2023 Professor of Conflict and Humanitarian Studies The New Arab "As the Israeli genocide in Gaza unfolds and global public awareness is becoming increasingly acute, it is becoming clearer that the myths surrounding the colonial conflict in Palestine serve not as guides to understanding, but as barriers. These myths, perpetuated by pro-Israel propagandists, Western powers, and Arab regimes have had dire consequences – ones measured in lost lives, crushed hopes, and a perpetually destabilised region.", "Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza serves as a tacit admission of Israel's fragility". Yes Kittel 31 October 2023 History Professor Berliner Zeitung "No, Israel's military response is not genocide – regardless of whether one uses narrower or broader definitions of the term." No Mokhiber 31 October 2023 Specialist in international human rights law, policy, and methodology The New Republic "A director of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights has resigned, issuing a lengthy letter condemning the organization, the U.S., and Western media companies for their positions on the war between Israel and Hamas, which he described as a "text-book case of genocide."", ""Once again, we are seeing a genocide unfolding before our eyes, and the Organization that we serve appears powerless to stop it," wrote Craig Mokhiber, the group's New York office director, who had worked with the U.N. for more than three decades."" Yes Already in article 154 Holocaust scholars 1 November 2023 Holocaust scholars open letter at a conference in Prague "Today, more than ever, we need to reaffirm, without any caveats, the right of Jews to live in Israel and to defend themselves against those who deny Israel and Jews the right to exist. We deplore the humanitarian catastrophe of the Palestinian people in Gaza and note that it derives directly from the use of civilians as human shields by the Hamas. We, the scholars of the Holocaust assembled in Prague at the Lessons & Legacies conference, as well as other Holocaust scholars and persons devoted to Holocaust memory, unequivocally condemn the politics of terror pursued by Hamas and denounce the forces of global antisemitism." No McDoom talks about the statement in this journal article Jikeli 1 November 2023 Historian research paper "Only five posts were positive about Israel, some refuting the accusation that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians. Notorious Jewish critics of Israel, such as Norman Finkelstein (Figure 11), Gabor Maté, and Jane Hirschmann were repeatedly used to accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide, often with embedded videos.", "It is worth noting that according to the United Nations definition of genocide, the Hamas massacre is genocide, while the Gaza war is not." No Mack 1 November 2023 Human rights lawyer Haaretz "The contention that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza in retribution for Hamas' October 7 massacres is a false claim not founded in international law." No Not in article Waxman 2 November 2023 professor of political science Jewish Currents "To be sure, some of the deeply disturbing rhetoric coming from senior figures in the Israeli government [..] raises the risk of genocidal actions. [..] However, to claim that genocide is already occurring requires stretching the concept too far, emptying it of any meaning." Maybe Already in article via Vox article Berenbaum & Zavadivker 4 November 2023 Historians and Holocaust scholars: 1; 2 Jerusalem Post "Israel has no greater ambition than to coexist with the Palestinians as peaceful neighbors; [The genocide claims] "threaten future attempts to identify, prevent, and prosecute that crime. It is equally damaging to the legitimacy of Holocaust and Genocide Studies as a field when such false claims are presented in the guise of scholarly expertise."" No Shaw 6 November 2023 International relations prof, Sociologist specialising in genocide New Lines Magazine ""Genocide" is generally under-deployed because states wish to avoid the responsibilities to "prevent and punish" that the convention imposes on signatories, but there is a special aversion to investigating its implications for Israel's conduct. Western states continue to protect it out of a misplaced belief that Jews, having been prime historical victims of genocide, cannot also be its perpetrators. Israel's current policies are rapidly destroying that conceit, however, and bringing closer the day when its leaders — as well as those of Hamas — will be brought to account for their crimes." Yes Already in article Spencer 7 November 2023 urban warfare researcher CNN "Israel is upholding the laws of war" No 48 scholars 9 November 2023 Professor of Law and Globalisation, Professor of Criminology, Professor of Criminology, Senior lecturer in Sociology, Professor of Social Anthropology, 43 other scholars International State Crime Initiative "the Israeli state is employing its extensive and advanced military capacity to inflict violence on Palestinian peoples on such a scale that it is accurate to frame it as the annihilation phase of genocide.", "Israel's announcement of a state of 'total siege' of Gaza, cutting off water, food, electricity and medical supplies, amounted to a clear statement of intent to commit genocide against the Palestinian people by 'deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part' (Genocide Convention 1948, Article 2)." Yes Already in article Blatman 11 November 2023 Holocaust historian Haaretz "The mere fact that Israel and the Palestinians have been waging a bloody war between them for four generations, and they are both committing war crimes and hair-raising acts of violence, still does not mean that a genocide began in Gaza in October 2023" Maybe Adel & Gallagher 12 November 2023 International lawyer and PhD researcher; Staff attorney at the CCR Al Jazeera "What is happening in Gaza fits the definition of genocide.", "To understand what is transpiring in Gaza, we must turn to the key legal frameworks that define genocide: Article 6 of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court and Article 2 of the Genocide Convention. […] Gaza's devastating reality mirrors these components of genocide. Despite claiming to target only Hamas, Israel is engaged in an all-out assault on the whole population of Gaza." Yes Karsenti et al 12 November 2023 Political scientist, historian and sociologists: 1; 2; 3; 4 AOC "By denying their historical connection with Palestine and by attributing a genocidal intention to those who built a state to protect themselves from any genocidal recurrence, Didier Fassin reactivates a classic anti-Semitic gesture that always proceeds by inversion: accusing the Jews of being guilty of what one is preparing to do or fantasizes about doing to them.", "And yet, one must choose sides on the question of whether or not one recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist. If one recognizes it, then the massacre of civilians, intentionally targeted on its sovereign territory, gives it the right not only to defend itself, but to take the necessary measures to ensure that this can never happen again, and therefore to eliminate Hamas, whose program this is." No Not in article Jürgen Habermas, Klaus Günther, Rainer Forst & Nicole Deitelhoff 13 November 2023 Philosopher and Social Theorist; Professor of Law; Philosopher; Political Scientist Site of "Normative Orders" Research Center at Goethe University Frankfurt "The Hamas massacre with the declared intention of eliminating Jewish life in general has prompted Israel to strike back. How this retaliation, which is justified in principle, is carried out is the subject of controversial debate; principles of proportionality, the prevention of civilian casualties and the waging of a war with the prospect of future peace must be the guiding principles. Despite all the concern for the fate of the Palestinian population, however, the standards of judgement slip completely when genocidal intentions are attributed to Israel's actions." No Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor 13 November 2023 Human rights NGO Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor "Euro-Med Monitor renewed its calls on all countries across the world to take decisive action to end the Israeli genocide against the people of the Gaza Strip, citing their legal obligations to stop this horrifying crime against humanity." Yes Verdeja 13 November 2023 Professor of peace studies and global politics (with a focus on genocide) Time "Verdeja says Israel's actions in Gaza are moving toward a "genocidal campaign." While he notes that it is clear Israeli forces intend to destroy Hamas, "the response when you have a security crisis…can be one of ceasefire, negotiation, or it can be genocide."" Maybe Already in article Sanford 13 November 2023 Anthropologist specialising in Human Rights and Genocide Time "City University of New York professor Victoria Sanford compares what's happening in Gaza to the killing or disappearance of more than 200,000 Mayans in Guatemala from 1960-1996, known as the Guatemalan genocide" Yes Already in article Simon 13 November 2023 Global Affairs professor, Director of the genocide studies Time "Israel has only explicitly said they want to exterminate Hamas, and has not directly stated intent to "destroy a religious, ethnic or racial group." Simon says it's possible a court could conclude that either Hamas or some elements of the Israel Defense Force (IDF) could be found guilty of committing an act of genocide, but "it's certainly not textbook in that connecting the intent to destroy ethnic group as such is difficult."" Maybe Already in article Kiernan 13 November 2023 Historian, Professor of International and Area Studies Time "Israel's retaliatory bombing of Gaza, however indiscriminate, and its current ground attacks, despite the numerous civilian casualties they are causing among Gaza's Palestinian population, do not meet the very high threshold that is required to meet the legal definition of genocide." No Already in article Corn 16 November 2023 Professor of law and expert on military law The Jewish Chronicle "Many accuse Israel of genocide. These accusations undermine the meaning of what they allege. It might be appealing to toss such accusations about but, as Justice Stewart warned, the significance of the concept of war crimes and credibility of the law is eroded by such overbroad and often invalid accusations. One need only consider the genocide accusation. Palestinians make up 20 percent of the Israeli population with the same civil rights and legal privileges as any other Israeli citizen. How this aligns with the accusation that Israel is engaged in a systemic effort to destroy this ethnic group is perplexing. Nor do casualties in Gaza support even suspicion of genocide." No The view that Palestinians enjoy the "same civil rights and legal privileges" is highly contested by other legal experts. See 2010 report, 2022 report, 2023 report Butler 17 November 2023 Philosopher Frankfurter Rundschau Q: "Welche Reaktion erhoffen Sie sich als Unterzeichnerin des offenen Briefes "Philosophie für Palästina"?." [What reaction do you hope to get as a signatory of the open letter "Philosophy for Palestine"?] A: "Ich hoffe, dass der Völkermord an der Zivilbevölkerung in Gaza ein Ende hat. Es gibt Menschen, die sich von einem Völkermord abwenden, wenn er geschieht, und später bereuen, dass sie sich geweigert haben, das zu benennen, was sie sehen und wissen. Ich schließe mich denen an, die diese bösartige und vorsätzliche Gewalt als "Völkermord" bezeichnen, denn sie entspricht der Definition der Völkermordkonvention." [I hope that the genocide of the civilian population in Gaza will come to an end. There are people who turn away from genocide when it happens, and later regret that they refused to name what they see and know. I join those who call this vicious and deliberate violence "genocide" because it corresponds to the definition of the Genocide Convention.] Yes Goda & Herf 17 November 2023 Historians and Holocaust scholars: 1; 2 New York Times "Israel's targets are military: Hamas's soldiers, tunnels, headquarters and weapons stocks. By placing military targets in and under civilian structures, it is Hamas that violates laws of war. The 1948 U.N. Genocide Convention mentions demonstrable intent to destroy a national, racial or religious group. Mr. Bartov is mute about Israel's hundreds of phone calls to Gazans warning them to leave buildings in which Hamas fighters were located. Israel has urged civilians to evacuate to the south to escape battle. A government intent on genocide would do the opposite." No Eghbariah 21 November 2023 Human rights lawyer and academic The Nation "Some may claim that the invocation of genocide, especially in Gaza, is fraught. But does one have to wait for a genocide to be successfully completed to name it? This logic contributes to the politics of denial. When it comes to Gaza, there is a sense of moral hypocrisy that undergirds Western epistemological approaches, one which mutes the ability to name the violence inflicted upon Palestinians.", "If the international community takes its crimes seriously, then the discussion about the unfolding genocide in Gaza is not a matter of mere semantics.", "Numerous statements made by top Israeli politicians affirm their intentions. There is a forming consensus among leading scholars in the field of genocide studies that "these statements could easily be construed as indicating a genocidal intent," as Omer Bartov, an authority in the field, writes." Yes Crane 21 November 2023 International law scholar NPR "It's not an easy case because you have to have that smoking gun. So, you know, I respectfully disagree with his [Mokhiber's] approach on this. If you look at both parties in this tragedy that is unfolding, the prime minister of Israel has to specifically state that, I intend to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinian people. And I would suggest, respectfully, that that has not been said. Now, they have a long-term problem politically, practically and legally related to their treatment of the Palestinians. But I would beg to differ. I don't think one would categorize that as genocide." No Not in article Kotek 22 November 2023 genocide scholar L'Express "The Israeli offensive on Gaza is nothing like the Herero genocide" No Michlic 26 November 2023 genocide scholar Belfast Newletter "The left that expresses these ideas have no intellectual knowledge of international laws making clear distinctions between different ways of killings", "Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza that entails urban house-to-house fighting that regrettably creates many civilian casualties, as in other wars of this type". No Hope Murray 26 November 2023 President of the International Network of Genocide Scholars News Letter "When asked if the Gaza events are "genocide," [Murray] quoted approvingly from a piece by one of the network's members – Professor Martin Shaw [...]" Yes Not in article Buser 28 November 2023 Historian The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles "This is not genocide." No Friling, Jockusch, Steier-Livny, Patt & Porat 28 November 2023 Historians and Holocaust scholars: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5 Haaretz "Charging Israel With Genocide in Gaza Is Inflammatory and Dangerous. Historians must be guided by the facts, not political agendas. But when Omer Bartov in The New York Times charged Israel with 'verging' into genocide and ethnic cleansing, he grounded his argument in assertions, not evidence." No Already in article Moreno Ocampo 1 December 2023 Former chief prosecutor of the ICC Al Jazeera "The siege of Gaza itself, that is extermination or persecution as a crime against humanity, and it's a form of genocide... Inflicting conditions to destroy the group, that itself is a genocide. So creating a siege itself is a genocide, and that is very clear, that Israel want the siege is very clear. And the intentions to destroy the people, many officers from the Israel government are expressing genocidal intentions. That's why it's easy to say — under reasonable basis to believe — Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza." Yes Already in article Patel 2 December 2023 Legal researcher, reader in International law (holds LLM) Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ""The intent that we have observed is extensive and it comes from all quarters of the Israeli state," said Anisha Patel, a legal researcher with the group Law for Palestine — which provides legal analysis on international law as it relates to Palestinians." Yes Already in article Jones 2 December 2023 Political scientist, specialising in genocide Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ""I believe that the events of Oct. 7 qualify as a genocidal massacre of Israelis. I also think that the Israeli response, and indeed long standing Israeli policy towards the Gazan population, evinces elements of genocidal thinking and increasingly practice," he said." Maybe Ayyash 2 December 2023 Sociologist specialising in violence and colonialism Canadian Broadcasting Corporation "He says what's happening in Gaza is "a deliberate genocidal operation" and that Canada is complicit by having not called for a ceasefire." Yes Segal et al. 9 December 2023 60 scholars in Holocaust and Genocide Studies Contending Modernities "We, scholars of the Holocaust, genocide, and mass violence, feel compelled to warn of the danger of genocide in Israel's attack on Gaza.", "Moreover, dozens of statements of Israeli leaders, ministers in the war cabinet, and senior army officers since 7 October—that is, people with command authority—suggest an "intent to destroy" Palestinians "as such," in the language of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide." Maybe Already in article Ben Hounet 13 December 2023 Social anthropologist Lundi.am "Beaucoup de chercheurs en France et en Europe se refusent à parler de génocide et évoquent, au mieux, le terme de nettoyage ethnique. Faut-il leur rappeler que de nombreux génocides ont été perpétrés dans la continuation du nettoyage ethnique et lorsque celui-ci a été rendu impossible ? Combien de cases faudra-il cocher avant que les puissances occidentales se décident à réagir fermement et que les intellectuels se saisissent vraiment de ce sujet ?" [Many researchers in France and Europe refuse to talk about genocide and, at best, use the term ethnic cleansing. Should we remind them that many genocides have been perpetrated in the continuation of ethnic cleansing and when it has been made impossible? How many boxes will have to be ticked before Western powers decide to react firmly and intellectuals really take up this subject?] Yes Not in article Finkelstein 19 December 2023 Political scientist GV Wire "countered that Israel has been engaging in a genocidal war in Gaza since the conflict's inception" Yes Already in article Dirk Moses 19 December 2023 genocide scholar Democracy for the Arab World Now "Today, international law on genocide is working as it was designed to: allowing states to ruthlessly exterminate security threats while making it difficult to apply that law. By the reasoning of international lawyers supporting Israel's war in Gaza today, there are no limits to the number of Palestinian civilians who can be killed incidentally in the pursuit of Israeli military objectives.", "The grotesque nature of the law of genocide, however, is that victim numbers are irrelevant. All that counts is intent. If the intention is military rather than genocidal, many will argue not only that legitimate self-defense rather than genocide is taking place, but also that it is legal and even moral." Yes See also his November article in the Boston Review Ambos 22 December 2023 professor of criminal law and head of the Department of Foreign and International Criminal Law Hard to group into a clear category "Bartov chooses his words carefully. He warns of possibly impending genocide without claiming it is happening already. Some statements of certain Israeli policymakers are indeed worrisome. Yet, while they may be relevant for proving the necessary specific intent, they cannot automatically be attributed to the persons who are taking the military decisions." No Spencer 22 December 2023 genocide scholar K. online journal "As far as I am concerned, the charge of genocide against Israel is particularly shocking. It betrays a wilful refusal to recognise that Hamas has openly stated its genocidal aims, and has perpetrated acts which fall quite clearly within the definition of genocidal acts according to the Convention" No Lemkin Institute 29 December 2023 Antigenocide NGO Lemkin Institute "The genocide being perpetrated by the State of Israel is embedded in a complex historical, political, and strategic context that seems to have fostered and, ultimately, devolved into a pervasive genocidal dynamic on both sides of the conflict – Israel, on the one hand, and the Islamist militant organization known as Hamas, on the other – as well as among segments of their respective populations, especially, as will be explained below, in the case of Israel.", "The Lemkin Institute believes that Israel's retaliation against Palestinians amounts not only to war crimes and crimes against humanity, but also to genocide, as also asserted by, among others, the former Director of the New York Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Craig Mokhiber." Yes Already in article Bishara 1 January 2024 Political philosopher, director of the ACRPS Al-Muntaqa, journal of the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies "The essay contends that Israel and its allies' claim of self-defence to justify their genocidal actions in Gaza and to marginalize moral judgements is a blatant lie.", "In this case, shared identity is a motive for rejecting Israel's monopolization of the conversation, its claim to speak in the name of the Jews while committing genocide, and its distortion of that identity with its criminal practices against the Palestinian people." Yes Includes specific responses to Habermas' arguments. Swazo 1 January 2024 Professor of philosophy North South Journal of Peace and Global Studies "Undoubtedly, the State of Israel is an Occupying Power and subject to the law of the Geneva Conventions in the manner of its treatment of the Palestinian people. In relation to international positive law (the Geneva Conventions, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, etc.) and the morality central to the jus gentium, the State of Israel is by no means to be excepted in the way it decides to conduct itself vis-à-vis the Palestinian people in the Occupied Territories, including Gaza. The Palestinians throughout the Occupied Territories are entitled as a matter of jus gentium to the full protection the international community of nations can muster on those grounds. Thus, Louis Rene Beres (1989, 29) is entirely correct to remind that, the Genocide Convention, along with other "human rights 'regime'" treaties and declarations, "represents the end of the idea of absolute sovereignty concerning non-intervention when human rights are in grievous jeopardy." And, this certainly applies in the case of Israel's war being waged against the Palestinian people in Gaza (with spillover effects in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as the IDF supports settler Israelis in their hostile acts of dispossession and displacement of the Palestinians in those quarters)." Yes Cohen and Shany 2 January 2024 International Law Professors: 1 2 Just Security "The raising of even more serious charges – such as the commission of genocide, the "crime of crimes" – requires an even higher commitment to factual analysis, which should include all relevant facts, including those "inconvenient" to whoever is making such claims. Many of the allegations made in this regard, including those found in the recent South African application to the ICJ appear to fall short of this standard. Still, we do consider the South African application as potentially useful in drawing more attention to the positive obligations of the State of Israel to suppress incitement to genocide and to address potentially genocidal statements made in public by Israeli influencers and politicians." No Shaw 3 January 2024 International relations prof, Sociologist specialising in genocide Journal of Genocide Research "Likewise warning of the potential for genocide as a maximal end-state obscured the genocidal process that was already occurring, [...] Moreover, if the United Nations Genocide Convention was an inevitable reference point, the choice to hew close to a legal tick-box exercise not only allowed defenders of Israel's violence to argued that the criteria had not been met. It also sidelined the Convention's manifold defects, recognized in the field since its inception, and those of the subsequent jurisprudence, recently exposed in the case of Ukraine.", "It was therefore essential to recognize that in genocidal war, policies radicalize. Israel's initial genocidal thrust contained the potential for a greater genocide, which might turn the right's most ambitious ideas into reality." Yes Already in article International Coalition to Stop Genocide in Palestine 3 January 2024 100 international organisations Common Dreams "urging governments across the globe to formally support South Africa's International Court of Justice case against Israel, accusing the government of genocidal violence in Gaza.", Yes Already in article Multiple specialists in international medicine 6 January 2024 The Lancet "Before October's escalation of violence, the effect of the Israeli siege of Gaza had already been described as a "slow-motion genocide".", "We situate this violence in relation to the definition of genocide as described in Article 2 of the Genocide Convention, focusing on physical elements including killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, creating life-threatening conditions, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children.", "As public health and humanitarian professionals, we the authors state emphatically that the grave risk of genocide against the Palestinian people warrants immediate—and now overdue—action." Yes Already in article Rosensaft 9 January 2024 Professor of law, expert on genocide law Times of Israel "The word genocide is used willy-nilly by people all over the world, but genocide, as it has evolved since 1948 when the genocide convention was first adopted by the UN General Assembly, is a legal concept. And whatever else Israel is doing, and has done, it is not intending to destroy the Palestinian people; either on the West Bank or in Gaza", "Even Netanyahu, with whom I fundamentally disagree on most issues, is not planning to evict the Palestinians from Gaza. So the term genocide does not work.", "October 7 was a deliberate action by a genocidal organization that targeted Israeli — meaning Jewish — civilians: women, men, children, and the elderly." No 1,347 francophone academics 9 January 2024 (most relevant not all) L'Humanité "Nous nous opposons aux graves violations par Israël des droits humains et de la liberté académique des Palestiniens, à la guerre génocidaire en cours à Gaza ainsi qu'aux arrestations et détentions arbitraires en particulier celles subies par les étudiants et le personnel palestinien dans les universités de Cisjordanie." [We oppose Israel's grave violations of Palestinian human rights and academic freedom, the ongoing genocidal war in Gaza, and arbitrary arrests and detentions, particularly those suffered by Palestinian students and staff in West Bank universities.] Yes Paul 10 January 2024 Professor of law San Francisco Chronicle "I see no evidence that Israel is trying to destroy all or a substantial part of the Palestinians." No Schabas 10 January 2024 Professor of international law, and expert in genocide ITV "Professor William Schabas, an elected President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, was one of the world's first experts to sound the alarm, citing "serious risk of genocide" as early as late October 2023. "The evidence today is even more compelling," he told ITV News. "To me it is increasingly clear that Israel is not aiming to defeat Hamas, but rather to uproot or erase the population of Gaza."" Maybe Already in article Boyle 10 January 2024 Professor of international law ITV "Professor Francis Boyle, who won the first case ever under the genocide convention at the ICJ for the republic of Bosnia Herzegovina against Yugoslavia, said he is confident South Africa will win an order against Israel to cease and desist from committing all acts of genocide against the Palestinians. He told ITV News: "When I submitted my case, I had to work on it on my own. South Africa has an impressive team of experts who have managed to put together the most comprehensive and impeccable application."" Yes Flasch 10 January 2024 Legal Consultant in Public International Law, with a focus on armed conflict EJIL:Talk! - Blog of the European Journal of International Law "Despite having been firmly established in international law for three quarters of a century, the definition and requisite elements of the international crime of genocide appear to have been misunderstood or, in some cases, deliberately misapplied, seemingly by both scholars and laypersons.", "Labelling Israel's military operation against Hamas as an act of genocide may threaten to undo 75 years of work to prevent and punish the commission of genocide, by diluting and diminishing the effect of the Genocide Convention." No Wiese 11 January 2024 "research assistant and doctoral candidate at the Chair of European Law, Public International Law and Public Law" Stern "but is usually very difficult to prove"; "The destruction of the group must be the sole aim of the perpetrator"; "under international law, there is a right to self-defence" {{ }} Herik 11 January 2024 professor of international public law Leiden University website "That is a claim that is very difficult to prove, because you have to prove that Israel is acting with the specific purpose of exterminating the Palestinians." {{ }} Roth 11 January 2024 Lawyer and human rights activist PBS News Hour "I think there's not much question that the level of killing, the level of deprivation is sufficient to meet that predicate part of the crime of genocide." "This is all genocidal intent. [South Africa] also kind of worked backwards from the acts on the ground to say that, because Israel is bombing so indiscriminately, because it's using these massive 2,000-pound bombs in heavily populated areas, that this also shows an indifference to Palestinian civilian life, which itself is indicative of genocidal intent." Yes Walter 11 January 2024 Professor of international law Reputable online legal publication "Although the high number of civilian deaths and the enormous material damage are horrific, they do not necessarily prove an intent to commit genocide. For example, the repeated calls for the civilian population to leave certain parts of the area or the observance of the obligation to warn and set a deadline before withdrawing protection from a civilian hospital because it is being used outside its humanitarian purpose to commit acts harmful to the enemy speak against such an intent." No Platt 12 January 2024 social sciences professor with a focus on genocide research Deutschlandfunk Kultur (Audio episode) "Genocide really doesn't fit here/does not fit at all" (from title) No Boot 15 January 2024 Military historian The Washington Post "But while it's easy to second-guess the actions of Israeli forces, there is no evidence that they have engaged in a deliberate campaign to 'destroy, in whole or in part,' the Palestinian people — which is what 'genocide' means in international law. Awful as the civilian deaths in Gaza have been, they still constitute less than 1 percent of the territory's population. If Israel, with all the firepower at its disposal, had been trying to commit mass murder, the death toll would have been higher by orders of magnitude.", "That's why the charge of genocide has been rejected not only by the United States but also by Canada, Britain and Germany, among others." No Not in the article Mirsky 17 January 2024 Middle east and human rights expert UnHerd "South Africa was able to present evidence of genocidal-sounding intent from any number of political actors in the Netanyahu government. None of them, though, have direct decision-making authority over the conduct of the war, leading to open hostility between some of them (Itamar Ben-Gvir above all) with the IDF high command. That direct authority is reserved not just to the military professionals, but to the war cabinet, convened by Netanyahu to insulate him from his own coalition partners, and in which the political opposition to Netanyahu is well-represented; given Israeli public fury at Netanyahu, he would no longer be in power if they weren't in the room. Moreover, if genocide were Israel's aim, issuing warnings before bombings, creating humanitarian corridors (however limited), and allowing in food and other necessities would be a pretty poor way of going about it." No The evidence provided by South Africa in their submission, as detailed in this Guardian article, includes comments made by Yoav Gallant (Minister of Defence and member of the Israeli war cabinet), and made by Benjamin Netanyahu (Prime Minister of Israel) as evidence of genocidal intent. El-Affendi 18 January 2024 Professor of Politics and Dean of Social Sciences Journal of Genocide Research "If the (televised) Syrian genocide was the first internationally tolerated series of atrocities, then the recent genocidal violence in Gaza is the first with active input from the "international community."", "One maxim it should state is: if a series of actions approach genocide sufficiently to occasion a debate on whether they are genocide or not, then they are evil enough to be denounced without ifs or buts" Yes Already in article Samudzi 18 January 2024 Sociologist Journal of Genocide Research "Thus, inhered within this strategy, within Israel's retaliatory campaign on Gaza, is a transtemporal logic of genocide that attempts to neutralize the Gazan Palestinian in the present so as altogether displace and/or eliminate its presence and foreclose the possibility of its future.", "Because of the legal impunity that Israel has enjoyed, the question of genocide in Palestine transcends the applicability of the Genocide Convention (though, arguably, present violence in Gaza includes nearly every act outlined in Article II) and can be better sociologically understood through the eight techniques of genocide outlined by Lemkin himself." Yes Already in article Muravchik 18 January 2024 Political scientist The Wall Street Journal "Hamas, not Israel, is guilty of genocide." No Levene 21 January 2024 Professor of Jewish history and genocide Journal of Genocide Research "All that said, if the utterance of genocide too obviously sticks in the craw for those like Illouz, who might read an inherent dissonance in the implication of a post-Holocaust state committing the act – arguably the ultimate Jewish taboo – there might be other routes by which we could overcome a semantic disagreement.", "The reality of the situation, whatever nomenclature genocide scholars may consider most appropriate – genocide, genocidal warfare, permanent security, urbicide, social death –the Israeli state this time has dissolved any remaining vestige (if ever there was one) of moral unassailability and given other (liberal or illiberal) states who might have their own unfinished reckonings with communal adversaries the respectability of open season to do their worst." Yes Already in article 1,600 academics 23 January 2024 Various, some relevant La Jornada "Luego de rechazar cualquier discurso de odio o discriminación, llamaron a los universitarios de todo el país a apoyar diversas acciones, entre ellas sumarse al exhorto que lanzaron mas de mil 600 académicos de todo el continente a los gobiernos progresistas de América Latina para que actúen de forma conjunta contra el “genocidio” y presionen por un alto al fuego inmediato." [After rejecting any hate speech or discrimination, they called on university students throughout the country to support various actions, including joining the exhortation launched by more than 1,600 academics from all over the continent to the progressive governments of Latin America to act together against the "genocide" and press for an immediate ceasefire.] Yes Dershowitz 24 January 2024 Professor of law Ynet "Israel did not commit genocide, the number of civilians who were killed is proportional to the number of combatants, it is lower than any war in modern history. Israel is trying its best to preserve civilian life, whereas Hamas is doing its best to take civilian lives." No Semerdjian 24 January 2024 History professor, Chair of Armenian genocide studies Journal of Genocide Research "Furthermore, as the civilian/combatant distinction has collapsed, and given the scale of civilian destruction, it appears the distinction between the targeted bombing promised by "humane war" and indiscriminate bombing has largely vanished. Since everything from taking shelter in hospitals or fleeing for safety is declared a form of human shielding, the entire civilian population has been transformed into a legal target. This too is the logic of genocide.", "Terms like "civil war," "conflict," and even "counterinsurgency" frequently serve as legal cover for genocide, and in its wake, form the repertoire of genocide denial.", "For many, the killing of Palestinians in Gaza is justifiable self-defense. In the wake of 7 October, America and European allies offered support for Israel's unrestrained "right to defense" for "permanent security" in the tradition of America's own War on Terror. The problem is, genocides are also premised on the right to security and self-defense against an existential threat." Yes Already in article Fassin 25 January 2024 Anthropologist and sociologist AOC "Didier Fassin joue un rôle de lanceur d’alerte lorsqu'il écrit le 1er novembre 2023 : « Alors que la plupart des gouvernements occidentaux continuent de dire "le droit d'Israël à se défendre" sans y mettre de réserves autres que rhétoriques et sans même imaginer un droit semblable pour les Palestiniens, il y a en effet une responsabilité historique à prévenir ce qui pourrait devenir le premier génocide du XXIe siècle. »" [Didier Fassin plays the role of whistleblower when he writes on November 1, 2023: "While most Western governments continue to say "Israel's right to defend itself" without any reservations other than rhetorical ones and without even imagining a similar right for the Palestinians, there is indeed a historical responsibility to prevent what could become the first genocide of the 21st century."] Yes Kontorovich 25 January 2024 Lawyer, specialising in international law Israel Hayom "The good news was the International Court of Justice did not effectively order us to wait to be tortured and murdered, by demanding a halt to the Gaza War. That is certainly good – but only in the twisted world where the ICJ is putting Israel, not Hamas, on trial for the absolutely absurd charge of genocide." No Already in article Üngör 26 January 2024 Professor of genocide studies Journal of Genocide Research "The dynamic of violence since 7 October then is not a qualitative transmutation, but a corollary of the path-dependent history of the conflict: asymmetrical power relations, and annihilatory attitudes towards civilians.", "It is also evident to most observers that the Israeli reaction is unmistakably counter-genocidal in terms of the quantity, quality, and dynamic of mass violence. Even if we disregard the quantitative dimension of the ongoing death toll, an analysis of the qualitative elements of the violence indicates a complex process of destruction." Yes Already in article Lederman 29 January 2024 Holocaust scholar Journal of Genocide Research "On 7 October, Gaza became a laboratory for genocidal violence. I use this term to distinguish it from genocide per se, to refer to violence that has certain genocidal characteristics but not others.", "Considering the importance of settler colonialism as a frame of analysis in genocide studies, we may do well to consider Gaza as a laboratory not just for the dynamic of settler colonialism and its contemporary relevance as underlying hegemonic legal, political, and moral frameworks, but also for the politics of applying this frame and its moral implications." Maybe Already in article Illouz 2 February 2024 Professor of sociology The Forward "The people who surround him —Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich — are more overtly fascist. They believe in violence. Their camp murdered Yitzhak Rabin. They hold and defend Jewish supremacist views. Their declarations after Oct. 7 amounted to calls to genocide (even though I do not think Israel is committing genocide)." No No longer in article Charny 2 February 2024 genocide scholar Genocide Watch "Israel is fighting back legitimately in Self-Defense in Response and in Self-Defense against Future Genocidal Attacks that Employ Citizens as Human Shields. The Geneva Conventions specifically outlaw use of human shields and justify fighting back in response. Self-Defense does not include genocidal intent." No El-Affendi 3 February 2024 Professor of politics, Dean of Social Sciences Al Jazeera "Increasing partisanship in Genocide Studies threatens the field itself", "An endless stream of interventions in the media accompanied and followed these initiatives, exhibiting mounting polarisation and politicization", "This public split among scholars prompted the Journal of Genocide Research, the leading and oldest periodical in the field, to organise a forum on the topic 'Israel-Palestine: Atrocity Crimes and the Crisis of Holocaust and Genocide Studies'. It invited a small number of leading figures in the field", "Overall, in the forum, there was uneven worry about the health of the field, but near consensus that what Israel is doing in Gaza is certainly "genocidal" if not outright genocide", "I also stand by my point that the increasing polarisation and partisanship in the field, together with the 'major democracies' simultaneously assuming the role of participants and deniers, is a very serious blow to the whole endeavour of genocide prevention." Yes Mockaitis 4 February 2024 Historian The Hill "The IDF campaign has left much of Gaza in ruins, displacing people and creating a massive refugee and humanitarian crisis. However, the use of excessive force stems from an aversion to [Israeli military] casualties, not genocidal intent. If the massive assault on Gaza is not genocide, it may constitute a war crime, although that will be hard to prove. No Trachtenberg 7 February 2024 Historian, specialising in Jewish History The New Yorker "Trachtenberg testified to a consensus opinion among historians of genocide that what is happening in Gaza can indeed be called a genocide, largely because the intent to cause death on a massive scale has been so clear in the statements of Israeli officials. "We are watching the genocide unfold as we speak," he said. "We are in this incredibly unique position where we can intervene to stop it, using the mechanisms of international law that are available to us."" Yes Already in article Burke-White 8 February 2024 Professor of international law University of Pennsylvania website "It should be noted that genocide is an incredibly difficult crime to prove. Genocide refers to any of a series of acts – such as the killing or the transfer of children—undertaken with "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group." Historically, courts have struggled to prove the relevant intent, which is not just murder but a concerted policy to destroy a people as a whole. For South Africa to win this case, it will need to find and provide evidence that the Israeli government's intent was not merely to prevent attacks such as those of October 7 or to degrade the capability of Hamas, but rather to annihilate the Palestinian people as a whole." {{ }} Fassin 8 February 2024 Anthropologist and sociologist Journal of Genocide Research "It is a similar exercise that I want to propose here about the arguments used by those who have championed the right of Israel to defend itself at whatever cost for Palestinian civilians and have attacked those who have alerted the world to the risk of a genocide being perpetrated in Gaza", "As the destruction of public infrastructures, including hospitals and schools, and the tally of civilian casualties, mostly children and women, increased in Gaza on a scale never seen before in Palestine, the qualification of the war crimes committed by Israel as possibly a genocide by scholars, lawyers, experts from international organizations and even governments has generated hostile reactions in Israel and among supporters of the Israeli politics of retaliation, mostly in Western countries.", "The critics of this qualification, many of them academics, maintained that a state created for a people victim of the quintessential genocide could not be suspected of committing a similar crime", "Alerting to the prospect of a genocide being perpetrated in Gaza is stigmatized as an unconscious desire to have a genocide perpetrated against the Jews." Yes Already in article Posen 14 February 2024 Political scientist and security analyst Foreign Policy "One answer is simple. When war is fought among civilians, civilians are killed.", "Western militaries, including the IDF, try to live by these laws, though the law of armed conflict does not proscribe them from waging war. They try to follow these rules in part because they reflect the values of the societies that they serve and in part because of an expectation of reciprocity, but also because pragmatically, they know that lots of civilian casualties can become a political liability at home and abroad. Hamas spends the lives of Palestinian civilians as ammunition in an information war." No Green 16 February 2024 Professor of Law and Globalisation State Crime Journal "Just two months after this special issue was finalized Israel launched its catastrophic, genocidal assault on Gaza.", "As this timely and crucially important volume demonstrates Israel's genocide of the Palestinians is bound both to the logic of settler colonialism and to the necessity of its abolition.", "What we are witnessing now, not only in Gaza but across historic Palestine is the denouement in Israel's genocide of the indigenous Palestinians…a second Nakba and as Knesset member Arial Kallner demanded one that dwarfs the Nakba of 1948." Yes Not in the article Genocide Watch 20 February 2024 Antigenocide NGO Genocide Watch "These are the signs of the genocidal process in Israel's war in Gaza: Israel's leaders persist in conflating all Palestinian people with Hamas. [classification]; Israel's leaders incite genocide against Palestinians by dehumanizing Palestinians as "human animals" and by summoning Biblical justification for genocide [dehumanization, polarization]; Israel collectively punishes all Gazans for the actions of Hamas. Israel's leaders deny that there are any innocent civilians in Gaza. This falsehood denies any duty to obey the laws of war, which require avoidance of attacks on civilians. [dehumanization, polarization]; This collective punishment is used to justify the bombing and killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian women, children, and noncombatants, including at least 85 journalists [persecution, extermination]; Israel has forcibly displaced 1.7 million Gazans from their homes into tent cities [persecution]; Israel bombs and assaults hospitals where wounded civilians seek medical care and shelter [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs and attacks areas in Gaza to which it has directed civilians for their "safety" [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs “escape routes” it has designated for Palestinians fleeing Israeli attacks [persecution, extermination]; Israel's blockade and siege of Gaza is producing widespread famine [persecution, extermination]." Yes Not in article Falk 25 February 2024 Professor of international law, and Chair of EuroMed-Monitor Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor "This pattern is quite extraordinary because the states supporting Israel, above all the United States, have claimed the high moral and legal ground for themselves and have long lectured the states of the Global South about the importance of the rule of law, human rights, and respect for international law. This is instead of urging compliance with international law and morality by both sides in the face of the most transparent genocide in all of human history. In the numerous pre-Gaza genocides, the existential horrors that occurred were largely known after the fact and through statistics and abstractions, occasionally vivified by the tales told by survivors. The events, although historically reconstructed, were not as immediately real as these events in Gaza with the daily reports from journalists on the scene for more than three months." Yes Human Rights Watch 26 February 2024 International human rights NGO Human Rights Watch website "The Israeli government is starving Gaza's 2.3 million Palestinians, putting them in even more peril than before the World Court's binding order", "The Israeli government has simply ignored the court's ruling, and in some ways even intensified its repression, including further blocking lifesaving aid" Yes Already in article Amnesty International 26 February 2024 International human rights NGO Amnesty International website "One month after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered "immediate and effective measures" to protect Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip from the risk of genocide by ensuring sufficient humanitarian assistance and enabling basic services, Israel has failed to take even the bare minimum steps to comply, Amnesty International said today." Yes Already in article Fakhri 27 February 2024 Professor of law, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food The Guardian "Michael Fakhri says denial of food is war crime and constitutes 'a situation of genocide'", "In my view as a UN human rights expert, this is now a situation of genocide." Yes Already in article Giroux 1 March 2024 Scholar and culture critic Policy and Practice: A Development Education Review "While the International Court of Justice judgment should be welcomed, it is hard to imagine why there isn't an immediate call for a cease-fire and a full-fledged acknowledgment of Israel's committed war crimes and acts of genocide.", "Higher education may be one of the few sites left where prominent issues such as the genocidal war on Gaza can be analysed, engaged, and subject to the rigours of history, a comprehensive analysis, and relevant evidence." Yes 1,346 academics 1 March 2024 (some relevant not all) Academics 4 Peace "Israel's assault on Gaza appears to include both acts and intent stated in the definition of genocide.", "President Biden, do not let the United States go down in history as the enabler of genocide" Yes Not in the article Segal & Daniele 5 March 2024 Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies; Professor of law, specialising in armed conflict, humanitarian, and international law Journal of Genocide Research "Finkel reasonably concluded that it was "hard to imagine a more actionable template to destroy a national group," and that the "combination of official statements denying Ukraine and Ukrainians the right to exist, and mounting evidence of deliberate, large-scale targeting of Ukrainian civilians" left "little room for doubt" that “the threshold from war crimes to genocide" was crossed.", "Applying the same standard indicated by Finkel to the Israeli mainstream political and media discourse about Palestinians, the threshold from war crimes to genocide has been crossed before 7 October. In May 2023, a clear template to destroy a national group was proposed by Jeffrey Camras in an article in the Times of Israel. Camras proposed that "in order to right a wrong, in order to make peace and move forward, Palestine must be obliterated."", "Nonetheless, no Holocaust scholar viewed this situation in the way Finkel saw Russia's attack on Ukraine. Most Holocaust scholars, in fact, never even mentioned the large body of evidence of Israeli international crimes in the fifty-six years of Israeli occupation.", "The very different ways in which Holocaust scholars, on the one hand, and those working in Genocide Studies, on the other, have responded to the unfolding mass violence in Israel and Palestine after 7 October point to an unprecedented crisis in Holocaust and Genocide Studies. We argue that the crisis stems from the significant evidence for genocide in Israel's attack on Gaza, which has exposed the exceptional status accorded to Israel as a foundational element in the field, that is, the idea that Israel, the state of Holocaust survivors, can never perpetrate genocide." Yes Already in article Feldmann 6 March 2024 Professor of international law Time, via World Socialist Website "Israel's efforts to defend itself against Hamas, even if found to involve killing disproportionate number of civilians, do not turn Israel into a genocidal actor comparable to the Nazis or the Hutu regime in Rwanda. The genocide charge depends on intent. And Israel, as a state, is not fighting the Gaza War with the intent to destroy the Palestinian people.", "These relevant facts matter for putting the genocide charge into the context of potential antisemitism. Neither South Africa nor other states have brought a genocide case against China for its conduct in Tibet or Xinjiang, or against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. There is something specifically noteworthy about leveling the charge at the Jewish state—something intertwined with the new narrative of the Jews as archetypal oppressors rather than archetypal victims. Call it the genocide sleight of hand: if the Jews are depicted as genocidal—if Israel becomes the very archetype of a genocidal state—then Jews are much less likely to be conceived as a historically oppressed people engaged in self-defense." No Scholars of Middle East Studies 11 March 2024 Middle East Studies Association Al Jazeera "accelerating scale of genocidal violence being inflicted on the Palestinian population of Gaza" Yes Already in article Quigley 14 March 2024 Law professor EJIL:Talk! - Blog of the European Journal of International Law "South Africa will be able to present considerable evidence of knowing destruction, from the mouths of UN officials and representatives of non-governmental aid organizations.", "The "conditions of life" were imposed not merely on discrete sectors of the group, but on its entirety. Israel had control over both egress and ingress from the relevant territory. No intent alternative to that of destruction was apparent." Maybe Already in article Pfeifer/Weipert-Fenner/Williams 21 March 2024 Professor and scientific staff blog of peace research institute "Whether the ICJ will classify Israeli violence as genocide cannot be answered at this point in time." Maybe Albanese 25 March 2024 Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967;[6] researcher and international lawyer[7] United Nations "By analysing the patterns of violence and Israeli policies in its onslaught on Gaza, the present report concludes that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating that Israel has committed genocide has been met. One of the key findings of the report is that the Israeli executive and military leadership and Israeli soldiers have intentionally distorted jus in bello principles, subverting their protective functions, in an attempt to legitimize genocidal violence against the Palestinian people" Yes Already in article Sahara 1 April 2024 Professor of political science The Journal of Research Institute for the History of Global Arms Transfer "The scale of violence of the recent Israeli war has already exceeded the initial stages of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and is becoming an immense ethnic cleansing comparable with the Armenian case. In light of the bellicose discriminatory discourses of the Israeli leaders, systematic destruction of civilian targets, forced starvation, and rapidly deteriorating hygiene conditions in Gaza, there are ample grounds to believe that the war on Gaza will develop into a full-fledged genocide if unchecked." Maybe Not in the article 1,101 lawyers 3 April 2024 Various legal scholars and practitioners Open letter to Rishi Sunak "These facts demonstrate a pattern of behaviour giving rise not only to specific violations of IHL and of crimes against humanity but also, when taken together with the evidence of genocidal intent in statements by senior Israeli officials cited by the ICJ in its Provisional Order, a serious risk of genocide. That risk relates in particular to the Genocide Convention Article II (a) "killing members of the group"; (b) "causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group"; and (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part". In light of the infant and maternal mortality rates and the destruction of Gaza's healthcare system described above, these facts may also give rise to violations of Article II(d), i.e. "imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group"." Yes Already in article Signatories include Jonathan Sumption, Brenda Hale, Nicholas Wilson and Robert Carnwarth Lévy 4 April 2024 Philosopher France Info "Il n'y a pas de génocide à Gaza, il n'y a pas de massacre délibéré des populations civiles" [There is no genocide in Gaza, there is no deliberate massacre of civilian populations.] No Not in the article Bauer 6 April 2024 Genocide scholar Kan 11 "Of course this is not a genocide. It is absolutely clear. But it doesn't mean that I justify what Israel does in Gaza. I think the killing that we cause there is what is called in academic language mass atrocities crimes. But obviously all comparisons to genocide are baseless." No Not in the article Talmon 7 April 2024 Professor of international law Süddeutsche Zeitung "This is clearly a war crime. But not genocide." No Already in article Braverman 9 April 2024 Former Attorney General of the United Kingdom LBC "I very strongly rebut suggestions that Israel is in breach of international law, that there's a genocide, that there's a forced starvation." No Not in the article Ashour 10 April 2024 Professor of Economics, International relations project coordinator, Organiser Docentes con Palestina Público "Este viernes, Docentes con Palestina ha convocado concentraciones a mediodía en todos los centros de enseñanza de Galicia en solidaridad con el pueblo palestino, para alertar una vez más del genocidio y para que el alumnado educado en el siglo XXI sea consciente de que está viviendo en directo uno de los peores horrores que han ocurrido en la historia de la raza humana." [This Friday, Teachers with Palestine has called for midday rallies in all educational centres in Galicia in solidarity with the Palestinian people, to warn once again of the genocide and so that students educated in the 21st century are aware that they are living in directly one of the worst horrors that have occurred in the history of the human race.], "Explicar que ahora mismo está ocurriendo un genocidio y exigir su final es difícil, pero es una tarea absolutamente pedagógica", sostiene." ["Explaining that a genocide is happening right now and demanding its end is difficult, but it is an absolutely pedagogical task," he maintains.] Yes Not in the article Walzer 17 April 2024 Professor/well known philosopher and political scientist Die Zeit "No. There is no genocidal intent on the Israeli side. Some members of the Israeli government want to drive the Palestinians out of Gaza and relocate them. But fortunately, they are not the decisive force in government." No Not in the article Whyte 17 April 2024 Professor of philosophy, and political theorist (see also) Journal of Genocide Research "Israel's conduct in Gaza, and the US's active legal support for it, forces us to grapple with the seemingly unthinkable: a perfectly legal genocide, that is a genocide legitimized via a permissive interpretation of IHL.", "By turning to Gaza, I show that Israel has mobilized a deeply permissive account of IHL to justify its use of starvation as a tool of genocide.", "Notably absent from Power's statement was the stance for which she became famous: moral condemnation of a US administration that responds to genocide by rendering "the bloodshed two sided and inevitable, not genocidal."" Yes Not in the article Robinson 17 April 2024 Professor of Sociology Journal of World-Systems Research "Genocidal pressures were building up against the Palestinians well before the siege of Gaza that began in the wake of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack. In Israel it is now perfectly normal to call for genocide against the Palestinians; whereas to the contrary, it is looked upon as treason to defend Palestinian life." Yes Not in the article Patel and Ben Imran 21 April 2024 1: Legal researcher, reader in International law (holds LLM); 2: Reader in International law (holds LLM) Al Jazeera "Last month, our organisation, Law for Palestine, made the first in a series of submissions to the ICC, characterising the crime of genocide committed by Israeli leaders against the Palestinian people. The 200-page document, drafted by 30 lawyers and legal researchers from across the world and reviewed by more than 15 experts, makes a compelling case for the genocidal intent as well as for the prosecutorial policy that the court has followed in other cases.", "We also refer to the database we have put together of more than 500 instances of Israeli incitement to genocide as additional proof. While the statements form a substantial part of the intent component of the crime of genocide, the submission goes beyond and highlights the various actions and official policies that additionally prove intent." Yes Not in the article Suny 25 April 2024 Historian The Nation "The world is watching a genocide taking place in real time." Yes Not in the article Donoghue 26 April 2024 President of the ICJ during the hearing on the SA case BBC News "The court decided that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide and that South Africa had the right to present that claim in the court. It then looked at the facts as well. But it did not decide – and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media – it didn't decide that the claim of genocide was plausible. It did emphasize in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided." Maybe Already in article Goldmann 26 April 2024 Professor of international law Junge Welt "The law professor does not expect a clear conviction of Israel in the South Africa-Israel case, nor a clear dismissal of the lawsuit." "According to Article II of the Convention, a breach occurs when an actor implements the intention to destroy a group of people in whole or in part by killing, injuring or restricting the living conditions of said group. In the case of Israel, there is no "smoking gun" that clearly proves such an intention, explained Goldmann. Statements by Israeli politicians in the media are "non-authoritative sources"" No Not in the article Shalhoub-Kevorkian 26 April 2024 Professor of law, specialising in trauma, state crimes, genocide, gender violence and surveillance The Guardian "Her lawyers and international academics have condemned Hebrew University for fuelling months of political attacks on one of their faculty in the run-up to her detention. The rector called on her to resign in late 2023 after she signed a letter calling for a ceasefire in Gaza and describing Israel's campaign as genocide, and she was briefly suspended over the podcast cited in her interrogation." Yes Not in the article Jamshidi 6 May 2024 Professor of law Journal of Genocide Research "That application was preceded by weeks of public debate and insistence by Palestinians and others – including genocide scholars – that Israel was either already committing genocide against the residents of Gaza or risked committing genocide [...] The law of genocide often tells us to disregard what our eyes leave little doubt is happening. This creates a profound disconnect between the legal definition of genocide and popular and historical experiences and understandings of the term. By situating the catastrophe in Gaza both within Israel's long history of eliminationist violence towards Palestinians and fine-tuned legal arguments, South Africa has brought the law into line with the historical reality and lived-experiences of the victims of genocide, forcing a dialectical conversation between two, often, opposing planes – the law on genocide and the reality of genocide." Yes Not in the article Sultany 9 May 2024 Reader in Public law Journal of Genocide Research "Legal discourse needs to match the reality of horror to maintain its relevance. Although legal scholars and commentators were slow to recognize the severity and urgency of the situation, this article sought to show that there is an emerging consensus that Israel's actions in Gaza are not another instance of armed conflict but instead amount to genocide. This genocide is committed against an integral component of the Palestinian people, a protected group under the Genocide Convention. The preceding discussion shows that obstacles facing a legal determination of genocide (namely, assessing the credibility of military logic and the existence of genocidal intent) are not insurmountable. The emerging consensus described here may not be overwhelming and will have to face opposition and potential judicial disagreement. Yet an overwhelming body of evidence supports it and a consistency in the application of standards requires it." Yes Already in article Several professors 10 May 2024 Several professors, including: Professor of information theory; Professor of political science; Professor of sociology, with a specialism in politics; Professor of sociology El País "La introducción al texto presentado por los catedráticos enumera cinco peticiones dirigidas al rector de la UCM: una condena "clara y explícita" de la destrucción deliberada de las universidades palestinas y el ataque a profesores, estudiantes y personal universitario; la petición de alto al fuego "inmediato y permanente"; la cancelación de toda colaboración con universidades israelís "que se relacionen con el genocidio de Gaza"; financiar programas para acoger a estudiantes y maestros palestinos; y la cancelación de toda colaboración con empresas o instituciones "que otorguen un apoyo directo o al genocidio en Gaza"." [The introduction to the text presented by the professors lists five requests addressed to the rector of the UCM: a "clear and explicit" condemnation of the deliberate destruction of Palestinian universities and the attack on professors, students and university staff; the request for an "immediate and permanent" ceasefire; the cancellation of all collaboration with Israeli universities "that are related to the genocide in Gaza"; funding programmes to welcome Palestinian students and teachers; and the cancellation of any collaboration with companies or institutions "that provide direct support or genocide in Gaza".] Yes Not in the article Pappé 15 May 2024 Historian, specialising in Israel-Palestine Al Jazeera "What we see now are massacres which are part of the genocidal impulse, namely to kill people in order to downsize the number of people living in Gaza" Yes Already in article Hartwig and Müller 16 May 2024 Scholars of international law: 1; 2 digital news partnering with big newspapers "I ultimately do not see sufficient grounds for genocide if one takes the legal term seriously."; "Even if individual actions by the Israeli armed forces can be described as war crimes, they do not [necessarily - added by me] at the same time constitute genocide." No Not in the article Sassoli and Diggelmann 20 May 2024 International Law Professors: 1; 2 SRF "«Certain statements by Israeli politicians were genocidal». There was talk of extermination. «But the actions of the Israeli army are, in my opinion, directed against Hamas and not against the entire population»"; "He does not believe that the International Court of Justice will find a generational[sic]intent to commit genocide in the South Africa v. Israel case." No Not in the article Maison 20 May 2024 Professor of international law Orient XXI "S'agissant de Gaza, la qualification de génocide peut également être sérieusement envisagée au regard, notamment, de la systématicité des attaques, de leur sens, et de leur inscription dans une offensive plus large contre la population civile." [With regard to Gaza, the qualification of genocide can also be seriously considered in view, in particular, of the systematic nature of the attacks, their meaning, and their inclusion in a broader offensive against the civilian population.], "C'est à ce moment qu’un élément inédit a été avancé en faveur d'Israël : une interview de l'ancienne présidente de la Cour internationale de justice, Joan Donoghue, affirmant que la juridiction n’aurait pas reconnu une affaire plausible de génocide (a « plausible case of genocide »). Rappelons ici que, dans son ordonnance du 26 janvier 2024, la cour affirme que le droit des Palestiniens d'être protégés contre les actes de génocide est plausible (§§ 36, 54), et qu'il existe une urgence, c'est à dire un « risque réel et imminent » de préjudice irréparable causé aux droits revendiqués (§ 61, 74). Il s'agit bien d'un risque de génocide, même si la cour n'emploie pas la formule « affaire plausible de génocide ». Les médias se sont précipités sur les propos ambigus de Joan Donoghue pour minimiser le sens de l'ordonnance et réfuter l'emploi du terme génocide." [It was at this point that a new element was put forward in Israel's favour: an interview with the former President of the International Court of Justice, Joan Donoghue, stating that the court would not have recognised a plausible case of genocide. Let us recall here that, in its order of 26 January 2024, the court affirms that the right of Palestinians to be protected against acts of genocide is plausible (§§ 36, 54), and that there is an emergency, that is to say a "real and imminent risk" of irreparable harm caused to the rights claimed (§§ 61, 74). This is indeed a risk of genocide, even if the court does not use the phrase "plausible case of genocide". The media rushed to seize on Joan Donoghue's ambiguous remarks to minimize the meaning of the order and refute the use of the term genocide.] Maybe Not in the article Illouz 21 May 2024 Professor of sociology Haaretz "A fierce military response facing unprecedented challenges in the history of warfare – because of a highly densely populated urban area, an underground city built below a civilian population – has become in the eyes of many a bona fide case of genocide", "Jews, Zionists and moderate people from all political parties and religions have watched the campus protests unfold in amazement, unable to believe the unselfconscious double standards, the baselessness of the historical parallels", "these protests give me no choice but to ask myself if, after all, something like the phantasmagoric irrationality of antisemitism is at work here." No Not in the article Khan 1 June 2024 Professor of international law ZDF "The defining element is above all the intent to destroy, which, however, can currently hardly be proven by the Israeli leadership" No Not in the article Ballantyne and Beddoe 1 June 2024 Professor of social welfare; Professor of social work Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work "Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the most-read article published in 2023 was a special editorial on Justice for Palestine included in issue four (Ballantyne et al., 2023). This was a statement by editorial collective members on the situation in Palestine. In the context of the genocide, we were all witnessing on our television screens and the silence of the IFSW on this matter, we felt compelled to comment. Since that editorial was published in December 2023, the horrifying death toll has not stopped climbing, and despite the statements made by the International Criminal Court to halt the ground invasion of Rafah, Israel continues its assault on Gaza and the West Bank unabated. The editorial collective continues to express our utmost solidarity with the Palestinian people and our deep concern for the future prospects of an international rules-based order that respects all peoples' human rights, including the right to self-determination." Yes Not in the article Ak 3 June 2024 Professor of political science Journal of Humanity, Peace and Justice "this research will also contribute to the related field of the social sciences as being the first clear example of genocide acts perpetuated by Israel so far in one of the whole Palestine territory like the Gaza Strip.", "At first, it will not be wrong to claim that the Palestinian cause regarding recent Israeli Gaza assaults is a trickling genocide, slow but relentless." Yes Not in the article Di-Capua 5 June 2024 Professor of history, focusing on intellectual history and the modern Arab world Journal of Genocide Research "Conditions for the emergence of a Jewish genocidal mindset in Israel evolved gradually since the 1970s.", "Positioned at the core of rural Palestinian life, these settlements serve as intellectual incubators and experimental laboratories of genocidal politics, chief of which is ethnic cleansing.", "By and large, though the IDF avoids drafting the most radical and violent members of Hardal, given the growing size of this demographic within the army, including among the officers’ corps and the growing number of soldiers who sympathize or directly belong to these genocidal circles especially on the field level, their influence is growing.", "A decade later, and in the context of the current war in Gaza, the rhetoric of a genocidal Jewish Holy War is being pushed into the mainstream like never before and is featured in many of its ground operations, especially among the ranks of the more popular infantry and armoured divisions." Yes Already in article Akram 5 June 2024 LAW clinical professor of law and director of LAW's International Human Rights Clinic Boston University Today & University Network for Human Rights Q:"For all of the condemnation of Israel's actions, there is also strong opposition to Israel's actions being labeled a genocide. Where does that pushback come from?". A:"The opposition is political, as there is consensus amongst the international human rights legal community, many other legal and political experts, including many Holocaust scholars, that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza." Yes Already in article Neier 6 June 2024 Human rights activist The New York Review "Hamas has embedded itself in the civilian population of Gaza, and its extensive network of tunnels provides its combatants the ability to move around quickly. Even if Israel's bombers were intent on minimizing harm to civilians, they would have had difficulty doing so in their effort to destroy Hamas. And yet, even believing this, I am now persuaded that Israel is engaged in genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. What has changed my mind is its sustained policy of obstructing the movement of humanitarian assistance into the territory." Yes Comments about how these actions are "indicative of genocide" are already in article attributed to Neier via this CNN interview Jacquet 6 June 2024 Professor of diplomacy and geopolitics Anadolu Agency ""Given the extent of the war crimes and the military operations carried out by the Israeli army on the ground, this situation can be considered genocide according to a growing number of international lawyers," Jacquet said." Yes Not in the article Choonara 12 June 2024 Professor of political economy International Socialism "US president Joe Biden, along with British foreign secretary David Cameron, were also isolated in their backing for Israel's genocidal offensive in Rafah." Yes Not in the article Totten 15 June 2024 Professor of history, specialist in genocide Arkansas Democrat-Gazette "I firmly believed, and continue to do so, that the Israelis had every right to retaliate against Hamas and to free those Israelis being held hostage by Hamas.", "Under the cover of the Israel-Hamas war, Israeli "settlers" on the West Bank are attacking Palestinian villages, forcibly removing the occupants from their homes and land, beating them (and in certain cases killing them), and stealing said land. And those Israeli thugs are doing so while under the protection and support of the Israeli army and police.", "It is crystal clear that both Hamas and the Israelis have already perpetrated, at the least, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Various others have also accused both Hamas and the Israelis of genocide. An international court will adjudicate this." Maybe Suslovic et al. 17 June 2024 Reader in social welfare; Professor of social work; Professor of social work; Professor of social work; Professor of social work; Organizer; Professor of social work Abolitionist Perspectives in Social Work "Since October 7, 2023, the world has witnessed Israel's unrelenting mass assault against the people of Gaza, killing more than 37,000 Palestinians. The response to this genocide in most sectors of professional society has largely been one of denial and suppression of solidarity with Palestine, unveiling extremes of the longstanding Palestine exception in progressive politics. This article contextualizes the social work profession's response to Israel's ongoing genocide of Palestinian people after October 7, 2023, including responses from schools of social work, social work agencies and organizations, and academic journals." Yes Not in the article Mordechai 19 June 2024 Historian The National ""The enormous amount of evidence I have seen, much of it referenced later in this document, has been enough for me to believe that Israel is currently committing genocide against the Palestinian population in Gaza," Mr Mordechai said in the introduction to a report he published." Yes The report, he previously wrote an article in Jacobin in April 2024 about the ongoing war crimes of the IDF, available here. 758 Scholars of the Middle East 20 June 2024 Brookings Institution "A majority of Middle East scholars see Israeli motives in Gaza to be about forcing Palestinians out [57%]" "How would you define Israel's current military actions in Gaza? Response: Major war crimes akin to genocide (41%), Genocide (34%), Major war crimes but not akin to genocide (16%), Unjustified actions but not major war crimes (4%), Justified actions under the right to self-defense (4%)". Maybe Already in article Ali 21 June 2024 Head of international law department at Bindmans LLP Middle East Monitor "He emphasised that, despite Israel's own repetition of genocidal intent, "Western leaders are guilty of viewing Palestine and Israel through the prejudiced prism of a merciless Palestinian terrorists against the gentle Jewish victims who are desperately maintaining the only democracy in the Middle East."" Yes Also includes new comments from Albanese and Sultany Rocafort, Hassan, Casani 26 June 2024 Professor of political science; Professor of computer science; Professor of political science elDiario.es "Después de ocho meses de genocidio en Gaza y más de 37.000 muertos palestinos, son cada vez más las voces que llaman al boicot académico a las universidades israelíes." [After eight months of genocide in Gaza and more than 37,000 Palestinian deaths, there are more and more voices calling for an academic boycott of Israeli universities.], "Existen ya diversos casos particulares de represión directa desde las universidades contra profesorado crítico con el genocidio." [There are already several particular cases of direct repression from universities against professors critical of the genocide.], "Al contrario, las universidades israelíes han sido una fuerza activa en la legitimación y mantenimiento de un sistema de segregación que ha sido considerado equivalente al apartheid sudafricano. Ahora mismo son colaboradores necesarios en el genocidio en curso." [On the contrary, Israeli universities have been an active force in legitimizing and maintaining a system of segregation that has been considered equivalent to South African apartheid. Right now they are necessary collaborators in the ongoing genocide.] Yes Schabas 28 June 2024 Professor of international law CBC News "There have been several genocide cases now at the International Court of Justice. I think the case that South Africa is setting out is easily the strongest case of genocide. The differences between, for example, the situation in the Balkans where the borders were largely open and porous and where people could flee, we don't have that in Gaza. The statements made by politicians in Israel, the notorious statements about how the Gazans are inhumane or 'human animals' was one of the terms, statements like, we're going to deny you electricity, water, medical care. The destruction of the institutions, all of these things add up and make for a very strong case... I can't entirely predict what the judges are going to do. And you certainly could exaggerate the importance of these provisional measures orders and suggest that they represent some kind of a determination of the issue, that is yet to come." Yes Already in article McAlister 29 June 2024 Professor of history Canadian Foreign Policy Journal "The genocide in Gaza is an opportunity for Canada to change that. A majority of Canadians may want to see a ceasefire in Gaza, but are they or their political representatives prepared to condemn the genocide?" Yes Not in the article Swoboda 4 July 2024 Professor of international and criminal law Ruhr University Bochum website "In my view, the criteria for genocide are not fulfilled, because the intention to commit genocide is not the only plausible motive for the use of violence. Israel justifies its attacks in the Gaza Strip with the right to self-defense and with the aim of freeing the hostages. This is permitted under international law, albeit perhaps within narrower limits than Israel is currently exercising." No Already in article Goldberg 11 July 2024 Professor of Jewish history Jacobin "I admit that, at first, I was reluctant to call it genocide, and sought any indication to convince myself that it is not. No one wants to see themselves as part of a genocidal society. But there was explicit intent, a systematic pattern, and a genocidal outcome — so, I came to the conclusion that this is exactly what genocide looks like. And once you come to this conclusion, you cannot remain silent." Yes Already in article UN Special Rapporteurs 11 July 2024 SR right to food, SR physical and mental health, SR human rights in the Palestinian Territory, SR drinking water and sanitation, SR human rights OF displaced persons, Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent United Nations "We declare that Israel's intentional and targeted starvation campaign against the Palestinian people is a form of genocidal violence and has resulted in famine across all of Gaza. We call upon the international community to prioritise the delivery of humanitarian aid by land by any means necessary, end Israel's siege, and establish a ceasefire." Yes Semerdjian 17 July 2024 History professor, Chair of Armenian genocide studies Journal of Genocide Research "By comparing contemporary examples of starvation warfare in Artsakh and Gaza, I seek to reintroduce the concept of genocide by attrition formulated by Raphael Lemkin in Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress (1944). Helen Fein's 1997 essay "Genocide by Attrition, 1939–1993: The Warsaw Ghetto, Cambodia, and Sudan," gave formal nomenclature to this genocidal tool.", "The carceral conditions produced by the 2006 enclosure of the Gaza Strip could be called Gazification. Land and territory are not only bifurcated with a discrete line separating two parts, but are fractured several times over through the creation of physical and digital checkpoints, "safe zones," and border inspections designed to make life suffocatingly unlivable. In order to survive, superfluous beings who resist these necropolitical forces live fugitive lives. Gazification should, therefore, be understood as an instrument of genocide by attrition that predates Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7." Yes Already in article Al-Hassani 1 August 2024 Postdoctoral researcher in Politics, Philosophy, and Religion SEPAD: Sectarianism, Proxies and De-sectarianisation "I have listened to academics in these different disciplines explore sovereignty, and after much reflection on the current genocide in Gaza, I am now convinced that sovereignty, in itself, is a concept weaponized to order and maintain European and Western hegemony over the global majority." Yes Not in the article Lapidot 7 August 2024 Professor of Hebraic Studies Journal of Genocide Research "Like anti-antisemitism, anti-colonialism too, instead of unsettling the purity of Western conscience, becomes a powerful tool for generating a perfect logos of absolute humanity that condemns its enemies as evil and unleashes holy wars. This is a danger that should be considered in countering the Israeli genocide narrative with a Palestinian genocide, or by depicting the Hamas attacks on 7 October as a ghetto uprising instead of as a pogrom." {{ }} Not in the article Bartov 13 August 2024 Holocaust and Genocide Studies professor The Guardian "By the time I travelled to Israel, I had become convinced that at least since the attack by the IDF on Rafah on 6 May 2024, it was no longer possible to deny that Israel was engaged in systematic war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocidal actions." Yes Already in article Previously stated in November "no proof that genocide is currently taking place in Gaza […] we may be watching an ethnic cleansing operation that could quickly devolve into genocide" Menon 13 August 2024 Professor of law Nordic Journal of International Law "This brings me to the comparisons between two recent cases: the wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Notwithstanding the vastly different histories leading up to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, they both share an important similarity: the allegations of genocide against Russia and Israel.", "If Israel was using self-defence as its mode of reasoning, Russia was protecting the populations in Donetsk People's Republic, Luhansk People's Republic and Ukraine from violations of the 1948 Genocide Convention. Russian actions rendered immaterial whether Ukraine was in fact committing acts of genocide or not, as do Israeli arguments of self-defence. Russian and Israeli 'responsibility to protect' those in its (former) colonies was a strategy of empire that is not unknown." Yes Not in the article Hammouri 20 August 2024 Lecturer in international law The Guardian ""The case for the US's complicity in genocide is very strong," said Dr Shahd Hammouri, lecturer in international law at the University of Kent and the author of Shipments of Death. "It's providing material support, without which the genocide and other illegalities are not possible. The question of complicity for the other countries will rely on assessment of how substantial their material support has been." Yes Already in article Bauhn 21 August 2024 Professor of philosophy Israel Affairs "Israel and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have been accused of 'massacring' Palestinian civilians, even attempting a 'genocide' on the Palestinian population in Gaza, as stated in a Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor posting on 16 May 2024, and reposted that same day by Relief Web, a news service provided by the UN office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Such accusations lack factual foundation about how the war against Hamas has been conducted.", "But there is no evidence whatsoever of any deliberate Israeli policy or plan to kill civilian Palestinians in Gaza that would remotely warrant terms like 'massacre' or 'genocide'." No Not in the article Razack 26 August 2024 Professor of gender studies Journal of Palestine Studies "The feminist truism that women are always raped in war is relied upon to confirm that mass rapes took place on October 7—a weaponization of feminism designed to shut down questions about evidence and the deliberate circulation of false narratives about rape, and, importantly, to legitimize Israeli state violence and genocide in Gaza." Yes Not in the article Ó Tuathail 30 August 2024 Professor of government and international affairs Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space "Israel's genocidal campaign against residents of Gaza" Yes Not in the article Murray 30 August 2024 Chief editor of the Journal of World-Systems Research Journal of World-Systems Research "Ten months into the genocide in Gaza" Yes Not in the article Albanese 1 October 2024 Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967;[8] researcher and international lawyer[9] United Nations "While the scale and nature of the ongoing Israeli assault against the Palestinians vary by area, the totality of the Israeli acts of destruction directed against the totality of the Palestinian people, with the aim of conquering the totality of the land of Palestine, is clearly identifiable. Patterns of violence against the group as a whole warrant the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) in order to cease, prevent and punish genocide in the whole of the occupied Palestinian territory" Yes Already in article Traverso 1 October 2024 Historian, contemporary and modern Europe [10] Google Books "The only normative definition we have, codified at the United Nations Genocide Convention of 1948, accurately describes the current situation in Palestine ... describes exactly what is happening in Gaza today" [11] Yes Already in article Lamensch 4 October 2024 Coordinator of Program and Outreach at Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (MIGS) Le Devoir "Lorsqu’il lui est demandé si un génocide est en cours, selon les définitions du droit international, Marie Lamensch, coordonnatrice de projets à l’Institut montréalais d’études sur le génocide et les droits de la personne de l’Université Concordia, à Montréal, répond qu’il faudra encore des années pour déterminer si c’est le cas ou non. Même les plus grands experts juristes le disent, ajoute-t-elle : ils veulent attendre tous les éléments de preuve avant de se prononcer de façon définitive. Car la preuve d’un génocide est complexe, et pour obtenir une condamnation, il faut notamment démontrer devant la Cour l’« intention » précise de le commettre." "When asked whether genocide is occurring, as defined by international law, Marie Lamensch, project coordinator at the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies at Concordia University in Montreal, says it will take years to determine whether or not that is the case. Even the greatest legal experts say so, she adds: they want to wait for all the evidence before making a definitive decision. Because proving genocide is complex, and to obtain a conviction, it is necessary to demonstrate before the Court the precise "intention" to commit it." Maybe Not in the article Becker 25 October 2024 Assistant Professor of International Human Rights Law [12] Vox (website) "Michael Becker, a professor of international human rights law at Trinity College, Dublin, said, overall, the above incidents and others mean 'South Africa has an ever-expanding repository of evidence that it can put before the [ICJ] as further evidence of genocidal intent,' which includes evidence suggesting Israel 'has not meaningfully sought to comply' with the ICJ’s orders so far." Yes Already in article Jones 25 October 2024 Professor in Political science, specialization in "comparative genocide studies and gender and international relations";[13] author of genocide textbook [14] Vox (website) "Any early hesitation I had about applying the 'genocide' label to the Israeli attack on Gaza has dissipated over the past year of human slaughter and the obliteration of homes, infrastructure, and communities" Yes Already in article Segal 25 October 2024 Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies [15] Vox (website) "'I fully stand behind my description of Israel’s attack on Gaza as a 'textbook case of genocide' because we’re still actually seeing, nearly a year into this genocidal assault, explicit and unashamed statements of intent to destroy,' he said. 'The way that intent is expressed here is absolutely unprecedented.'" Yes Already in article Verdeja 25 October 2024 Professor of peace studies and global politics (with a focus on genocide) [16] Vox (website) "it could be 'called a genocide, even in a narrow legal sense, for several months now' given the accumulation of Israeli attacks clearly and consistently targeting the civilian population in Gaza." Yes Already in article Waxman 25 October 2024 Professor of Political Science and Israel Studies [17] Vox (website) "Waxman has since qualified his stance, but still believes 'Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip — though too often brutal, inhumane, and indiscriminate — do not meet the international legal criteria of the crime of genocide.' ... Of the scholars we cited in our previous story, he was the only one who responded to my request for new comment who still did not think Israel’s actions qualify as genocide." No Already in article Bartov 6 November 2024 Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies [18] The Guardian "The ICJ will likely not rule for years about whether the situation in Gaza meets the narrow legal definition of a genocide. But Bartov believes that the operation in Jabalia is so blatantly genocidal that 'it is possible that the ICJ will find this operation to be genocide even if it hedges on the war in Gaza as a whole.' Which is what happened in the case of Bosnia, where the massacre in Srebrenica was found to be genocide." Yes Already in article Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices 14 November 2024 UN Special Committee OHCHR website "The developments in this report lead the Special Committee to conclude that the policies and practices of Israel during the reporting period are consistent with the characteristics of genocide." Yes Already in article Schabas 29 November 2024 Professor of International Law, expertise in international criminal law and international human rights law[19] Der Spiegel "I am neither a guru nor a judge. The courts will make a ruling, political bodies will decide in time. But I would say: There is a very strong case for arguing that Israel’s response constitutes the crime of genocide." Likely Not in the article Amnesty International 4 December 2024 International human rights NGO Amnesty International website "This report focuses on the Israeli authorities' policies and actions in Gaza as part of the military offensive they launched in the wake of the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023 while situating them within the broader context of Israel’s unlawful occupation, and system of apartheid against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Israel. It assesses allegations of violations and crimes under international law by Israel in Gaza within the framework of genocide under international law, concluding that there is sufficient evidence to believe that Israel’s conduct in Gaza following 7 October 2023 amounts to genocide." Yes Not in article European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights 10 December 2024 Human rights NGO ECCHR website "In recent months, ECCHR has been conducting independent research and analysis on the topic of genocide, and analyzing this against the available information and evidence relating to Israel’s actions in Gaza (see Question 6). This process has led us to the conclusion that there is a legally sound argument that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza." Likely Already in article Human Rights Watch 19 December 2024 International human rights NGO Human Rights Watch website "Human Rights Watch concludes that Israeli authorities have over the past year intentionally inflicted on the Palestinian population in Gaza 'conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.' This policy, inflicted as part of a mass killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza means Israeli authorities have committed the crime against humanity of extermination, which is ongoing. This policy also amounts to an 'act of genocide' under the Genocide Convention of 1948. The crime of genocide requires acts of genocide to be committed with genocidal intent. The ICJ has said that to infer such intent from a pattern of conduct by the state, it needs to be 'the only reasonable inference to be drawn' from the acts in question.130 The pattern of conduct set out in this report together with statements suggesting some Israeli officials wished to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza may indicate such intent." Likely ("acts of genocide" Yes) Already in article Médecins Sans Frontières 29 December 2024 International humanitarian NGO MSF website "Our firsthand observations of the medical and humanitarian catastrophe inflicted on Gaza are consistent with the descriptions provided by an increasing number of legal experts and organisations concluding that genocide is taking place in Gaza." Likely Not in article Other scholars have offered opinions relating to the topic of incitement to genocide, but have not specifically drawn conclusions on the question of genocide itself. Sources Name Month Profession Source Example statement (English or autotranslated and verified) Simplified position Notes 100 civil rights organisations and 6 scholars 20 October 2023 Scholars: Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Historian, specialising in Jewish History, Anatomical Pathology Technologist (part of Forensic Team at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia), Professor of Human Rights and Environmental Justice, Historian and Sociologist, Anthropologist specialising in Human Rights and Genocide Al Mezan Center for Human Rights "clear intent to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity and incitement to commit genocide, using dehumanizing language to describe Palestinians." — Sfard 3 January 2024 Human rights lawyer The Guardian "Sfard said he was stunned by the speed with which incitement to genocide and other extreme speech had been normalised in Israel.", "The gap between that and the freedom and impunity for those who advocate all kinds of things – ethnic cleansing, killing civilians, bombarding civilian areas, and even genocide – doesn't square up, and that's something for the authorities to explain." — Already in article Mack 6 January 2024 Human rights lawyer Middle East Eye "In view of the attorney general's failure to enforce the law or any accountability in the Huwwara case, it is no surprise that Israeli officials and politicians took advantage of the climate, following the Hamas attack, in order to incite deadly harm against the entire civilian population in Gaza.", "Given that senior members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government and those in the parliament have explicitly supported violence, terrorism and genocide against the Palestinians, any criminal proceedings initiated against them would be seen across the political spectrum in Israel as an attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government." — Intondi 1 August 2024 Professor of history Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament "The Law for Palestine project, a UK based human rights organization has so far documented over 500 statements made by Israeli officials which could potentially amount to incitement of genocide, which is prohibited under international law.", "Are these individuals advocating for nuclear war or inciting? Is calling for the use of nuclear weapons, the same as calling for genocide?" — Not in the article

Levivich (talk) 17:07, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

• In that case, having read the sources in the template, I'm inclined to oppose the inclusion of Gaza here. The entry that swayed my opinion most was the Brooking Institute in June saying A third of scholars see Israel's military actions in Gaza as 'genocide' [34%] While I'm aware that the article itself mentions that an additional 40 percent of the scholars liken Israeli actions to "major war crimes akin to genocide," I don't consider that a classification of genocide in and of itself. Therefore, the fact that Israeli actions in Gaza amounting to genocide is a minority opinion in what I think it's reasonable to conclude is the segment of the scholarly population most likely to hold that opinion means that don't think Gaza should be included on this list out of an abundance of caution. (And out of a similar abundance of caution, I don't think this list should include any ongoing genocides until the dust has settled, but the implications of that opinion for the list leaves the scope of this RfC.) DecafPotato (talk) 04:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

  😂 Levivich (talk) 19:38, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

  ? - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

  See Argument from incredulity. Partofthemachine (talk) 04:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

  I would point to the inclusion criteria for this list are recognised in significant scholarship as genocides, and if you look at the academic publications in the collated list (see scholarship), all bar 1 (who terms it genocidal violence [...] to distinguish it from genocide per se), call Israel's assault on Gaza a genocide. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

• Comment — The real question here is what is the scope of this article? If the criteria is "recognition in significant scholarship as a genocide", as is stated in the lead of this article currently, then clearly this belongs. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 03:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
• Include Significant historic genocide that has already been the subject of international decision making in the International Court of Justice. Dimadick (talk) 07:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
• Include. Historians like Pappé have been describing it as a genocide for years. Recent scholarship and international law decisions confirm it.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:09, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
• Include Why wouldn't we? The article Gaza genocide exists, the result of a veritable fountain of expert sourcing supporting the view that such a thing is beyond mere assertion, whatever the disagreement.Selfstudier (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
• Don't include. Just as there are many sources calling it a genocide, there are many others disputing that (see the discussion here). Also, the argument that the relevant article is now named Gaza genocide is spurious and should be ignored by the closer. The move is under review now and in any case Wikipedia is not an RS. Alaexis_¿question? 08:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
• Don't include - We should avoid including this in the list due to significant controversy and lack of international consensus. The status of events in Gaza as genocide is highly disputed, and there's no unified recognition from the international community. Adding it could compromise Wikipedia's neutrality. Including Gaza in the list of genocides could set a precedent for adding other highly disputed events, potentially leading to an influx of controversial and politically charged entries. This could undermine the integrity and credibility of the list as a whole, making it harder for readers to trust the information presented.Eladkarmel (talk) 08:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
• Include - It's likely that by the end of current conflict, 10% of the population of the strip will have likely perished. I wonder how people would react if this kind of mortality occurred in a western country. Say if some entity eliminated 30 million Americans or something. What kind of language would get bandied about then? My sense is people wouldn't hesitate to call it the "destruction of a people in whole, or in part". NickCT (talk) 12:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  I don't know how did we arrive at 10%, it's currently ~38,000 people, around 1.7% of Gaza's population (if we accept the Hamas-run sources, which also include an unknown but significant number of Hamas militants). During World War II, approximately 8.23% of Germany's population died. Does this mean the Allies committed genocide against the German people? The answer is no. They were not systematically planned or executed with the intent to exterminate the German population. I don't get this logic. HaOfa (talk) 14:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  That's true. It's not measured in deaths. It's measured in bringing about the end of conditions that maintain life and a society, like, I don't know, razing an entire territory to the ground, destroying the civic infrastructure, killing every doctor, scholar, poet and medic, torturing civilians to death in detention centres – all of that fascistic stuff. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  The number you cite is deaths directly attributal to conflict (i.e. people hit by bombs and bullets). The number discussed in the Lancet piece I linked to is the excess mortality figure (i.e. it includes things like deaths from the starvation and disease arising from the conflict). I guess the allies weren't really trying to rid a place of Germans (except maybe France), which I guess is what makes the parellel different. NickCT (talk) 18:18, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  @HaOfa Gaza MoH figures only include bodies retrieved after Israeli attacks. They don't include excess mortality. Yet, even though the Russians didn't kill a single Ukrainian during the Holodomor – all its 3–5 million victims died of starvation – we consider the event as genocide and include all the indirect deaths in the count. Similarly, I see no reason to exclude indirect deaths from the victim count in Gaza. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:52, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include: It's a list of "genocides", and the clue is in the name. It's not a list of court-ruled genocides, scholarly consensus genocides or anything else. The very notion of not including Gaza genocide seems to rather spit in the face of the RM and community consensus that determined it be named as such. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  But it is, the article clearly says that it includes only scholarly consensus genocides. HaOfa (talk) 14:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  No, it says "recognised in significant scholarship", which Gaza genocide is, hence the RM result. This is just going to keep going around in circles. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  Even if we were to use scholarly consensus (which is not the inclusion criteria for the list), looking at the specifically expert opinions published in academic literature you will find all bar 1 (who terms it genocidal violence [...] to distinguish it from genocide per se) call Israel's assault on Gaza a genocide. Which, at least currently, sounds like a consensus. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include. As the above table demonstrates, the body of academic opinion that this is genocide is large and growing. I also point to the 17-page legal opinion, written in April this year to the British government and signed by over 600 lawyers (including former Supreme Court judges) that has condemned Israel's actions as genocidal (see here). In addition, the ICJ said in its interim ruling on the South African case that Israel would be in breach of the Genocide Convention if it continued to block the provision of aid to Gaza, which it has done. TRCRF22 (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
• Don't Include. THE UN did not say that there is a genocide. Only Francesca Albanese and she's clearly a very controvertial figure. As long as most countries do not recognize this as a genocide and academics and experts are divided on this, this remains an extremely minority view, and should not be included in the list. ABHammad (talk) 07:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

  What is this rambling comment? The UN isn't particularly relevant here and no one has based their assessment on it, so that's a straw man. Genocides are also not determined by "most countries recognizing them"; I'm not sure if countries recognising genocides has ever been much of thing, let alone a metric that anyone is following. Occasionally there are stories about countries refusing to recognize genocide, but that's normally the accused, like Serbia re: Bosnians; Turkey re: Armenians; etc. The standard here is relevant experts, and to state with any confidence that it's a minority view you'd have to either show more relevant experts rejecting the notion than affirming it, or produce a source that specifically declares it to be a minority scholarly assessment. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

  @ABHammad: The UN said precisely this. The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Occupied Territories represents all the UN members and is precisely the UN that speaks. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

  Francesca Albanese is a highly controversial figure who has faced criticism from the US, UK, and France for her extreme anti-Israel bias. Some leading figures even described her opinions as bordering on antisemitism. Recently, there have been investigations into her potential connections with Hamas. Since all these controversies exist, and the calls from the US for her dismissal, calling her "the UN that speaks" and using her opinion as the truth is very very problematic. Galamore (talk) 07:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  Anyone who criticizes Israeli actions will be characterized by many as a controversial figure with an anti-Israel bias whose views border on antisemitism. This is true regardless of the role of the person. It is even true for humble Wikipedia editors. The relevant fact of the matter from Wikipedia's perspective is that she is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories. Sean.hoyland (talk) 07:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  US, UK and France are three of Israel's greatest allies/supporters... IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 07:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Galamore: This is BLP violation territory, per WP:BLPTALK. I suggest you heavily redact the above. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  Francesca Albanese was not the only UN Special Rapporteur to describe it as genocide. Multiple others have done so as well, including Paula Gaviria Betancur, Michael Fakhri and other UNSRs from relevant areas. TRCRF22 (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include The United Nations includes Israel and all of its arms benefactors as a member country. They would deny genocide, wouldn't they? Dozens of reliable sources and scholars of genocide, unconnected from participation in the massive destruction regard it as such, and there's very few examples more clear-cut of genocide than what's happening in Gaza. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 22:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include. The policy question here is which side should be given more WP:WEIGHT: that Gaza genocide is a genocide, or it isn't. There are ~140 entries at Template:Expert opinions in the Gaza genocide debate, but two entries have been endorsed by hundreds of scholars, so lets focus on those:
  • April: A letter by law experts in the UK wrote "there are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating Israel’s commission of genocide is met". This was signed 59 professors of law and 105 lecturers of law (1,001 lawyers in total).
  • May-June: A survey by Middle East Scholar Barometer of 750 of Middle Eastern Studies scholars found: 75% defined Israel's actions as either major war crimes akin to genocide, or genocide, vs 24% who don't.
• Alternatively, we can focus on peer-reviewed scholarly publications in that table published in the last few months. The existence of Gaza genocide is supported by Semerdjian (Journal of Genocide Research, July); Green (State Crime Journal, June); McAlister (Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, June); Ak (Journal of Humanity, Peace and Justice, June); Di-Capua (Journal of Genocide Research, May); Jamshidi (Journal of Genocide Research, May); Sultany (Journal of Genocide Research, May) etc. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

  "The policy question here is which side should be given more WP:WEIGHT: that Gaza genocide is a genocide, or it isn't." — This is not true. The current criteria includes any events "recognised in significant scholarship as genocides". We don't need to, and shouldn't, be saying whether or not it is a genocide, but just that there is significant scholarship which considers it to be. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  My mistake, it turns out that previous consensus was indeed achieved here on the inclusion criteria being ""that are recognised in significant scholarship as genocides"". We ought to be following the WP:LISTCRITERIA consistently, and can't exclude a genocide that meets that criteria arbitrarily.

• Don't include. This event is not widely recognized as genocide, and the allegation itself has been described by many as inaccurate and politicized. We should keep this page focused on actual, widely accepted cases. Otherwise, this article, which is supposed to be neutral and encyclopedic, could turn into a propaganda page used in future conflicts to attack opponents with unverified allegations. Galamore (talk) 07:03, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Have you read the criteria that is required to be included in this list? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 11:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include obvious that it meets the list criteria, no serious argument from opposers that it does not. (t · c) buidhe 14:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include. recognised in significant scholarship as [a genocide] as per the list criteria.—Alalch E. 20:51, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
• Don't include – The classification of "Gaza genocide" is disputed. We should wait for a clearer consensus before considering inclusion. IntrepidContributor (talk) 15:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

  Consensus isn't the inclusion criteria for this list—blindlynx 15:46, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

• 'Include per Levivich's list of scholarship, it's discussed enough as a genocide to warrant listing. starship.paint (RUN) 15:20, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include. We already have Gaza genocide, and most of us have eyes and ears with which to see what Israeli politicians say and Israeli soldiers do on a daily basis. xDanielx does raise a good point however: we should be careful what we say in wikivoice. At present the list inclusion criteria is quite lax. The US State Department is in a bit of a pickle here, because if we change the criteria to academic consensus then the Holodomor entry goes. KetchupSalt (talk) 12:04, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include. When credible sources refer to it as genocide, why shouldn't it be included? The death toll estimates range from 40,000 to over 186,000 people. Hosein (talk) 01:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
• Include The classification is disputed, and we should not have an entry on Gaza until such a time as there is consensus in the scholarly sources. Quite frankly, adding "Gaza Genocide" to this list is absolutely taking sides in a contentious political/social dispute. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC) After some discussion, I've changed my vote to include on the basis that (a.) there is a more than nominal amount of scholarship alleging that Israel's actions in Gaza amount to genocide and (b.) the article now clearly states that inclusion in the list does not necessarily indicate universal consensus. I believe that the "don't include" votes have raised significant concerns regarding NPOV/due weight; these are concerns that I share. The entry should absolutely reflect that this is a controversial accusation which many reliable sources reject; it should absolutely not be written in wikivoice. My include vote is contingent on the text following our policies on due weight and NPOV; I would much rather not have an entry than have an entry that strays from these principles. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  The present list inclusion criteria does not require scholarly consensus. KetchupSalt (talk) 08:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  The article specifically requires that entries be “ recognised in significant scholarship as genocides”; any reasonable reader is going to interpret the presence of an entry as meaning there is widespread to undisputed scholarly consensus. If (a.) the quoted language were edited to note that recognition does not mean universal agreement/the absence of significant scholarship to the contrary and (b.) the Gaza entry gives sue weight to academic sources that do not find genocide, I would be willing to include. However, as the article is currently written I do not support inclusion. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 13:18, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  Recognition in significant scholarship is already not the same thing as having scholarly consensus. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  Our inclusion criteria should be fully spelled out and the distinction you identified should be clearly and unambiguously explained within the article itself. Basically, just be fully transparent about our rational. You and I may know the difference between consensus and significant recognition, but many casual readers skimming through the article will not. We’re dealing with a highly controversial subject and I think we need to be extra careful with our wording. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  I've added a sentence to this effect in the lead for clarity's sake, feel free to massage it—blindlynx 14:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  Given this additional clarification, I’m dropping my objection and will support inclusion of an entry on Gaza. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 15:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

• Include I realized i haven't explicitly stated my position in this discussion yet. For the sake of making the closer's life easier i think we should include given there is significant scholarship calling this a genocide—blindlynx 19:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

This has been going back and forth for a while, so let's go ahead and continue with the WP:DR steps. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

This does not pertain to the RFC question. Lets wait till it is resolved before we wikilawyer over the status quo. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Comment: The page included Gaza genocide at the time of publishing this RfC, as it was added two weeks prior. The question should possibly be about whether to remove it. — kashmīrī TALK 23:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC) This content was never stable on this page, and was forced in through edit warring. WP:ONUS: "The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." HaOfa (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC) This does not dispute the inclusion of Gaza prior to the RfD, in line with other similar conflicts like Rohingya. Ecpiandy (talk) 17:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• I think that we might need to clarify the standard for inclusion a bit. Currently it says the list is things that are recognised in significant scholarship as genocides, but this is ambiguous in a way that is leading to the split above - does it mean "significant scholarship exists that describes this as a genocide, even if it's in the minority", or does it mean "the consensus of all significant scholarship on the topic, taken collectively, is that it is a genocide?" Normally I think we use the latter standard for whether to call something a genocide in the article voice or not. --Aquillion (talk) 08:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  I'm inclined towards the former reading, mostly because the language parallels WP:WEIGHT. That said we should defiantly explain the state of current scholarly disagreement here for any entry—blindlynx 11:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

  I think that the latter option — that inclusion requires the consensus of significant scholarship – is best for the article, but I think that this question would be best posed as a separate RfC given its overarching scope. DecafPotato (talk) 08:07, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

  I don't see a difference between the two, consensus of a significant portion of scholarship can still be in the minority—blindlynx —blindlynx 18:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

It matters because, if it's in the minority view (or even if it's a plurality but is clearly disputed enough to not be an overall scholarly consensus), then we might mention it but wouldn't put it in the article voice. And this can be tricky for a list, where inclusion in a list of X carries an implication of "this is definitely X"; the list is "list of genocides", not "list of things scholars have described as genocides". --Aquillion (talk) 08:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

How do you assess the majority/minority? By the number of occurrences? By the number of copies printed? Are different academic publications weighted against each other, e.g., by impact factor? Is a UN report more or less of a majority opinion vs a thinktank report?

My feeling is that majority/minority can sometimes be merely abstract concepts on Wikipedia that get brought up simply to deny inclusion of specific opinion, under the pretext that the other side didn't provide that abstract "evidence of majority".

IMO, an opinion that's accepted beyond a niche community is probably WP:DUE for inclusion on Wikipedia, and then can be summarised in the lead, too, if it helps the reader to understand the subject better. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

There's an important difference between just mentioning something (which certainly does not require a majority; we cover minority views all the time) and putting it in the article voice (which implicitly treats it as established fact.) See eg. the dispute over how to cover the "Uyghur genocide" above, which similarly concerned the article title - there are definitely many sources using the term, and we would definitely cover those sources, there was never any doubt about that; it's just that there's not a clear scholarly consensus that it's a genocide, so we can't call it one in the article voice ourselves. The question of whether we can include something that lacks that sort of scholarly consensus in this list therefore hinges on whether inclusion in this list amounts to Wikipedia itself saying, in the article voice, "yes this is definitely a genocide." And if it's not intended to convey that, we should consider changing the name. (This is a common issue with lists that have "sweeping" declarative titles.) If the list is intended to contain a bunch of entries saying "respectable scholars A, B, and C call this event a genocide; scholars X, Y, and Z disagree" then it's not a list of genocides, is it? --Aquillion (talk) 05:35, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand, everything on wikipedia follows wp:Reliable sources so this has to be a 'list of list of things scholars have described as genocides' because scholars are the WP:BESTSOURCES—blindlynx 21:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

This is definitely an unorthodox comparison but over on the video-game side of Wikipedia we don't have a "List of the best video games" but a "List of video games considered the best," which has a strict inclusion criteria in which a game needs to be considered "among the best" by a set amount of reliable sources. It's not a 1:1 transition, obviously, but it might be worth restructuring this list slightly in that vein to relieve issues of wikivoicing, where an objective (or as close as one can get to objective) criteria can be set for inclusion. DecafPotato (talk) 12:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. This actually seems like a sound suggestion to me. CAVincent (talk) 17:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

To be clear are you proposing a title change or modifing the inclusion criteria? —blindlynx 21:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• But the level of sourcing needed to present something as a contested opinion with in-text attribution - "these scholars say ABC; these other scholars say XYZ" - is different from the level of sourcing needed unambiguously present something as fact. I think it's reasonably obvious that this is a situation where there's sufficient sourcing to present it as an opinion that many scholars of note hold, but not sufficient sourcing to present it as absolute uncontested truth. And that's a problem if inclusion in the article implicitly treats an event's status as a genocide as uncontested truth, at least within academia. --Aquillion (talk) 05:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

  This isn't and shouldn't be list as presenting uncontested truth though. It's a list of events where where there is enough scholarship that we should mention them, ie. their inclusion is WP:DUE. As DecafePotato said it's worth making this clearer—blindlynx 14:22, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

  The text of the disputed entry read "Israel has been accused by experts, governments, UN agencies and non-governmental organizations of carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian population during its invasion and bombing of Gaza during the ongoing Israel–Hamas war." — No one is proposing to present this designation as a genocide as an "absolute uncontested truth".

  More wording discussing its disputed status could be appropriate and perhaps the background of the entry in the table for the Gaza genocide could be made yellow or red to more clearly indicate its contested status. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 17:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

  There is no truth, only verifiability. And verifiability can only ever be a reasonable consensus among reliable sources. Dronebogus (talk) 08:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• See these two previous discussions which are relevant: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:List_of_genocides/Archive_13#Proposed_change_of_the_inclusion_criteria_to_align_with_Genocide_scholarship, https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:List_of_genocides#Inclusion_of_Gaza_genocide -IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
• Is there a rough “include” consensus? The supporters mostly cite, or at least acknowledge, that reliable sources have termed it a genocide; the opposers largely just say it’s “controversial” etc. which seems like WP:UNDUE weight to biased and non-expert sources Dronebogus (talk) 04:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

  I don't support inclusion, but yes, it does appear that there is a (contested) consensus to include. I'd say that this has now been adequately discussed and merits inclusion. CAVincent (talk) 06:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

  We can't make the sweeping conclusion that "reliable sources sources have termed it a genocide" when many of the academic sources being referenced here are published in fields that will effectively publish anything that agrees with the conclusion: "the Western world is bad". As editors, we shouldn't be expected to eschew our own editorial judgement of these low-quality sources just because they're associated with academia. Partofthemachine (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

  You mean genocide scholars in the field of genocide studies? Perhaps you could name the genocide scholars you take umbrage with as merely reactionary figures with no expertise? Iskandar323 (talk) 04:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

  That the Western world is bad is objectively true though; reality has a well-known Marxist bias. You'd need sources that contradict what we can see with our own eyes to claim otherwise. KetchupSalt (talk) 08:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

  Per WP:DCON, consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue. Most arguments against inclusion are either asserting that it is a fringe or minority view (which Template:Expert opinions in the Gaza genocide debate shows is clearly not true) or simply claiming without evidence that the experts are wrong. I am by no means an expert in policy, but I would agree that there is a consensus to include. TRCRF22 (talk) 06:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed reopening of Gaza RFC

I am proposing that we reopen the Gaza RFC to allow for further discussion. Its current result is effectively just a fiat of the editor that closed it, without seriously taking into account many of the arguments made. The result did not take into account that many of the cited sources, such as those in Middle Eastern studies, are ideologically captured and beholden to an anti-Western perspective and do not really have any academic rigor (our article on the subject mentions this). Partofthemachine (talk) 20:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Ummm ... there is a procedure to vacate an RfC close, and this isn't it. Please see WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. Newimpartial (talk) 22:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a crank proposal, but noting strongest possible oppose. That was a robust discussion, and calling the closure "effectively just a fiat" is not assuming good faith, or really even paying attention to the discussion and its closure. The consensus wasn't what I wanted, but it's the consensus. Reopening the discussion now is not going to change the consensus. CAVincent (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 September 2024

Remove “Gaza Genocide” as it is not a genocide, and the numbers are falsified. 180,000 people have not been killed, this is way over the number even Hamas themselves listed, which was 40,000. Half of which are Hamas militants. IZG123 (talk) 20:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: See #RFC - Inclusion of Gaza genocide above. There was a long discussion about this which concluded it should be included. — Czello ^(music) 20:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 September 2024 (2)

Add Jallianwala Bagh massacre to this list as well, as the lower estimate for deaths falls above the lowest in the list. Xyznwa (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

You'll need reliable sources that say this was a genocide. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 16:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Comparing stats from excess mortality, violent deaths, etc

The list is currently selecting as numbers for upper and lower bounds simply whatever is provided by the source as the "total", but in some cases that is excess mortality (over some defined time frame, when measurable) while in others that may be battle-related violent deaths, or else include nonviolent deaths as direct consequence of war activity (but still invariably a much lower number than excess mortality). See OurWorldInData's overview of some of these methodologies. These numbers are not simply comparable against one another, and certainly cannot be sorted in a list, without giving a deceptive impression.

The simplest place to start is to look at two general stats: excess mortality and violent battlefield deaths only, and find separate numbers accordingly. Some incidents have numbers available for one and not the other, and that's fine -- better to have numbers left blank than to give false comparisons. If a source for numbers does not make it obvious that its numbers come from one general methodology or another, then that source is probably unusable.

As an example, the numbers currently used for the Rohingya genocide entry are for deaths directly attributed to violence or consequences of displacement. This will invariably be a fraction of excess deaths. Excess deaths are in contrast used for the Darfur and DRC entries. (The Bosnian genocide number is simply incorrectly reported from source; if you get the correct number, it's not excess deaths or violent deaths, but their source Tabeau & Vijak use "war-related deaths" -- that's fine for the main article or blurb, but if your goal is to do a comparative list, there are more recent articles that try to calculate excess deaths in Bosnia.) SamuelRiv (talk) SamuelRiv (talk) 00:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

If this is going to happen, then the column names must be changed, and a lot of numbers must be deleted, "despite" what RS say (but in actuality being precise to RS; I'd argue right now the columns are SYNTH). This needs feedback, because it's basically rewriting the list, and I don't want to waste time on this if it's just going to be reverted endlessly. SamuelRiv (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 September 2024

Add the 1984 Sikh Genocide. Source: https://www.basicsofsikhi.com/post/sikh-genocide-of-1984 Gurnisha (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Another source: https://pub.njleg.gov/Bills/2020/SR/142_I1.HTM Gurnisha (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Not done. You'll need to show that "significant scholarship" considers this to be a genocide. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Include the Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland on the list

I believe this conquest should be included as it was an attempt to destroy the Irish race and Catholicism in Ireland. Anyone who knows about it can attest to its bloodiness. There also does exist significant scholarship calling it a genocide.

1. "Oliver Cromwell offered Irish Catholics a choice between genocide and forced mass population transfer". - Albert Breton, Nationalism and Rationality
2. "Therefore, we are entitled to accuse the England of Oliver Cromwell of the genocide of the Irish civilian population" - Ukrainian Society of America, Ukrainian Quarterly
3. "Faced with the prospect of an Irish alliance with Charles II, Cromwell carried out a series of massacres to subdue the Irish. Then, once Cromwell had returned to England, the English Commissary, General Henry Ireton, adopted a deliberate policy of crop burning and starvation, which was responsible for the majority of an estimated 600,000 deaths out of a total Irish population of 1,400,000" - Frances Stewart, War and Underdevelopment: Economic and Social Consequences of Conflict v. 1
4. "As a leader Cromwell was entirely unyielding. He was willing to act on his beliefs, even if this meant killing the king and perpetrating, against the Irish, something very nearly approaching genocide" - Alan Axelrod, Profiles in leadership
5. "The massacres by Catholics of Protestants, which occurred in the religious wars of the 1640s, were magnified for propagandist purposes to justify Cromwell's subsequent genocide" - Tim Pat Coogan, The Troubles: Ireland's Ordeal and the Search for Peace
6. "It was to be the justification for Cromwell's genocidal campaign and settlement" - Peter Beresford Ellis, Eyewitness to Irish history
7. "[The campaign was] a conscious attempt to reduce a distinct ethnic population". - Mark Levene, Genocide in the Age of the Nation State: Volume 2

ResearchAgent007 (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Seconded. It has been reliably estimated that up to 20% of the civilian population of Ireland died during the conquest, and some historians have put the figure as high as 41%. I have tracked down one additional academic source that supports inclusion: a 2017 article by Aziz Rahman, Mary Anne Clarke, and Sean Byrne that states "The 1649 warfare by Cromwellian soldiers culminated in acts of genocide against Irish Gaels with the liquidation of the inhabitants of Drogheda and Dundalk". - Peace Research, v. 49, no. 2 TRCRF22 (talk) 19:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

If we're going to try and get this added, looking at the list of sources in reference 39 in the article Cromwellian conquest of Ireland, and 331 in the article Genocides in history (before World War I)#War of the Three Kingdoms. Opposition to the inclusion in lists previously is the framing of historians who label it genocide or genocidal as being nationalist historians. Mark Levene who specialises in genocide refers to the Cromwellian conquest as such in volume 2 of "Genocide in the Age of the Nation State":

"[The Act of Settlement of Ireland], and the parliamentary legislation which succeeded it the following year, is the nearest thing on paper in the English, and more broadly British, domestic record, to a programme of state-sanctioned and systematic ethnic cleansing of another people. The fact that it did not include 'total' genocide in its remit, or that it failed to put into practice the vast majority of its proposed expulsions, ultimately, however, says less about the lethal determination of its makers and more about the political, structural and financial weakness of the early modern English state."

Any sources found supporting it's assessment as genocide should be added to, and quoted from, in the relevant main articles. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Content removal to be discussed

These two removals of content should be discussed. 1 & 2. @Andrevan. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I did explain in my edit summaries but happy to discuss, on the first, the Lancet letter is a letter, not a medical report. That letter is quite controversial and it's not up to snuff to be included in my view. On the second I clearly stated that the material wasn't referenced at all. Unless the reference is hiding somewhere. You may restore that with a proper footnote, of course, as per usual. Andre🚐 01:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have issue with the removal of the Lancet letter, as while their logic is fine, for an estimate I would want something that is more thorough in its calculations based on data coming out of Gaza. If it is re-added, it should be called what it is, which is not a "medical report". As to the blockade, while it's easy to add references for it, it may border in the excess detail area for inclusion in the list. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 16:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Andre🚐 18:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Darfur genocide

There is consistent evidence of attacks against the darfur people by militants aimed at the killing of civilians in the currentbongoing war. Why is this item jot on the list?

https://www.hrw.org/report/2024/05/09/massalit-will-not-come-home/ethnic-cleansing-and-crimes-against-humanity-el Varjagen (talk) 08:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

...it is. TRCRF22 (talk) 09:28, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 September 2024

Factorfiction0 (talk) 02:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Suggest changing "List of genocides in reverse chronological order" to "List of possible genocides in reverse chronological order"

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bunnypranav (talk) 06:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

There is no section on the Tigrayan/ Ethiopian Civil War ?

Mass Starvation, documented drone bombings (and sales, transport documentation), etc. Regardless of low-end/ average death toll, all 9/10 steps of genocide can be attested. 97.126.88.45 (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

you can open a talk page for it, do you have citations describing it as a genocide? From some metrics and the highest estimate it could be the deadliest war in the 21st century The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 12:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 October 2024

Under the section for Gukurahundi it lists the deaths as between 8000 and 300,000. However, inside the article nowhere are the estimations this high. I think this is upper bound is meant to be 30,000.

Change 300,000 to 30,000 2601:603:201:9C70:6594:29F2:5EBC:7D1F (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Done ✅ IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 November 2024

The Gaza genocide is a completely inaccurate and biased statement. Please remove this immediately. 108.51.151.24 (talk) 00:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Not done. There is consensus to include this. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Siege of Leningrad body count

Perusing the list, I was confused by the lack of a precise body count for the Siege of Leningrad. The lowest estimate is listed as the incredibly vague "more than 1 million", and there is no higher estimate. Surely there must be more detailed casualty counts than this available. TRCRF22 (talk) 20:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that formatting it like that is strange as 1) 'lowest estimate' already implies more than the number given and 2) not having it be a number makes it appear above the Holocaust when sorting the list by 'lowest estimate'. I propose changing it to '1,000,000' to fix both of these problems (any other change non-withstanding). Citation unneeded (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

The siege of Leningrad wikipedia page gives a more precise estimate of 1,042,000 civilian deaths. I would suggest that this would be a better number to use. 82.47.186.69 (talk) 14:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

tamil genocide

there’s an article on it. why not included on list? 157.131.130.26 (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of Gaza genocide

In the interest of avoiding further edit warring, I'm starting a section to discuss the Gaza genocide inclusion and the list inclusion criteria more generally.

I don't think we can verify many of the list entries as being the majority view in relevant scholarship. Usually we cite a couple sources that call the event a genocide. So, I support inclusion of any genocide described as such in a significant body of scholarship, with a disclaimer at the top of the list indicating that this list doesn't represent Wikipedia's viewpoint and a note of relevant disagreement with every disputed entry. (t · c) buidhe 19:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

In this case we should change the article name to present this change in criteria. Vegan416 (talk) 20:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

buidhe's suggestion is no different from the criteria that is currently detailed in the article lede, so a change of name is not necessary. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 21:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

we did that a few months ago—blindlynx 22:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

As per the discussion in April, it was agreed to change the criteria from the previous criteria where it was scholarship + "in line with the UN convention", to "significant scholarship" (this can be by prominence or by multitude), as most Genocide Scholars and related specialists use frameworks different to the UN convention. So in trying to apply the previous standard editors would have to make that determination which it was thought bordered to close to OR. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Buidhe's suggestion seems very reasonable to me: articles like this one should reflect significant body of scholarship. Of course we shouldn't require unanimity – there will always be sources close to or sympathethic to the perpetrators, while decisions by international tribunals unfortunately have also a political dimension and may or may not reflect the facts on the ground. Impartial scholarship appears the best way to go here. No disclaimer is necessary – there's no "Wikipedia point of view", and anyway every Wikipedia page already contains a link to Wikipedia:General disclaimer. — kashmīrī ^TALK 02:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

According to the definition of genocide on this very same page what is happening is Gaza is NOT genocide.

The definition on this page says "any of the following acts committed with INTENT TO DESTROY, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group..."

What is occuring in Gaza simply does not meet that definition. Israel is attempting to stop Hamas (a terrorist organization) from attacking them. The death of many Palestinians, while certainly tragic, is not the intent of the attacks. If there is anything close to genocide going on it is the attempted genocide of the Israeli people by Hamas since it is the intent of Hamas to wipe out all Jews. Jimv1983 (talk) 10:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

This is a list of events which have been classified as genocide by significant scholarship. Please read the rest of that section which makes it clear the UN definition is not always used is and is presented in the list as an example of a definition of genocide not the only definition of it—blindlynx 15:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm confused. I don't see any reference in this case to any significant scholarship. The only reference to any scholarship is the Time article, in which the referenced scholarship is (a) not significant and (b) not unequivocal. Moreover, this section of the article cites so little scholarship that it actually violates the basic Wikipedia standard of no original research. Based on these criteria, Gaza does not presently qualify. In contrast, it's rather shocking that Oct 7, 2023 is not listed, which is about as textbook a case of genocide as they come - the perpetrators themselves publicly declared their genocidal intent and indeed there is a separate Wikipedia article on it. Why is the latter not included here? ~~ Narc (talk) 06:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, keep it on here that is the way the consensus is going now, and you can see plenty of other massacres and events that are only considered as such by a few sourcesa as you say there. Ecpiandy (talk) 21:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

How are you gauging "consensus"? It looks to me like anything but. Narc (talk) 19:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

By including it, we're saying that it is a genocide. This is going beyond what we can reasonably do based on the current sourcing. For example, we exclude the Ukraine genocide. We need to wait until the ICJ ruling for both of these. BilledMammal (talk) 00:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's what we're saying necessarily. The standard I think, which is what it is written at the top of the list, is acceptance in some "significant scholarship". See for example the Holodomor: the majority scholarly position is probably that it is not a genocide, but we include it because there is legitimate scholarly debate. I think if we include the Holodomor we should include the Gaza genocide. Though there is also a reasonable argument to include neither. Endwise (talk) 01:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There are several items on the list that probably don't belong here, but given these events are happening now it's more important that we get this one right. BilledMammal (talk) 01:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The idea that including the Gaza Genocide means Wikipedia is saying it is a genocide is complete nonsense. Wikipedia does not make determinations of fact. It merely reports what authoritative sources say, and there are many authoritative sources saying what's happening in Gaza is a genocide. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 11:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Confused. I don't see any significant scholarship cited here. The only reference to any scholarship is the Time article, in which the referenced scholarship is (a) not significant and (b) not unequivocal. Moreover, this section of the article cites so little scholarship that it actually violates the basic Wikipedia standard of no original research. Based on these criteria, Gaza does not presently qualify. What "many authoritative sources" are you referring to?

In contrast, it's rather shocking that Oct 7, 2023 is not listed, which is about as textbook a case of genocide as they come - the perpetrators themselves publicly declared their genocidal intent and indeed there is a separate Wikipedia article on it. Why is the latter not included here? ~~ Narc (talk) 19:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there a reason you're making this same comment twice here? [20] IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Here you go. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 22:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ianbrettcooper

For anybody who feigns ignorance of these sources, which must at this point be simply in bad faith, the United Nations is officially examining what Israel is doing in Gaza for its constituting a genocide. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/11/there-must-be-due-reckoning-horrific-violations-possible-atrocity-crimes عبد المؤمن (talk) 23:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)