There is, indeed, a possible world in which Israel is committing a genocide. But in the actual world, NGOs, the northern autonomous olbast of Hezbollah, AKA Ireland, and the UN is redefining the term to accomodate their desire to accuse the Jews of committing it, stable references be damned. Now the allied war against the Nazis, by parity of the definition and its new application, is a member of the reference set answering the word "genocide."
10/7 and the war it caused was, among other things, a post war "would you side with the nazis" test and the world proved again that they would say anything to justify the killing of Jews and do and say much more to prevent them from eradicating the forces who did. Its been 3 years of the most morally debased discourse since the Wannsee conference, which, ironically, I doubt anyone with a tik tok understanding of genocide knows anything about.
There are several main thrusts to the genocide libel.
- One is Amnesty calling it a genocide even though they admit they have changed the definition of genocide to accuse Israel of it.
- One is an ‘independent UN report’ by three UN workers with a history of anti Israel activism which hasn’t been adopted by the UN.
- One is the ‘genocide scholars’ even though anyone (you don’t even have to be a scholar) can join the genocide scholars organisation and only 28 per cent of the 500 members voted in what was seen as a political hijacking.
- And finally you have South Africa and others bringing a genocide case at the ICJ. Nations behind this such as Ireland have pushed for the definition of genocide to be changed. The court has said it will allow the case to be heard even though Palestine isn’t a country and it’s being brought by a third party leading to confusion that this is a ‘plausible case’ for genocide rather than the more complicated idea that South Africa can plausibly bring this case.
In plain terms: Palestinians have a plausible legal right, under the Convention, to be protected from genocide, and South Africa has a plausible right to bring the case. That is all the word “plausible” referred to.
The Court did not find that it was plausible Israel was committing genocide.
In contrast you have facts.
If Israel intended to commit genocide of the Palestinian people (and intent is the key word in the genocide definition) it would not have fed them, given them polio vaccinations, moved them to humanitarian zones when it tried to fight Hamas etc and there would be many, many, many more dead.
That’s why you have these 6000 experts and genocide scholars saying it not a genocide.
The genocide libel against Israel was started in the 1960s by the Soviets to attack America and Israel. It was pushed though the USSR via the UN and now trips off the tongue of antisemites everywhere who don’t understand that genocide is different to war. Antisemites and ignorants who basically want to call a people who were victims of an actual genocide, genociders to appease their guilt, steal Jewish victimhood, dismantle the case for Israel and label Jews the new Nazis.