An Answer to the Charge of the Supposed ‘Genocide’ in Gaza

In predicting human behavior, few things are more certain than examining relevant past behavior. Simply put, the best evidence of what a person or group will do is what has repeatedly been done.

Given that, progressive claims of Israeli genocidal atrocities against Gaza Palestinians are unlikely to end anytime soon.

Unsurprisingly, those linking Israel’s intent to defeat Hamas to the wanton killing of Palestinian civilians are almost entirely far-left members of the Democrat Party.

And supporting that slanderous sham, those hyper-woke dramatists gullibly rely almost exclusively on Gaza media sources tightly controlled by Hamas. By any standard, that’s not exactly ironclad evidence of anything, much less Israeli conduct.

In fact, Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan predictably authored a 2025 House resolution, signed by 20 other Democrats, labeling Israel’s actions in Gaza as “genocide.” And equally expected, co-sponsors of that holding were Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, and Ro Khanna of California.

More recently, Democratic primary winners Brad Lander, Darializa Chevalier, and Claire Valdez joined New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani in also defining Israel’s actions in Gaza as “genocide.”

While civilian deaths in Gaza linked to Israeli actions to destroy Hamas are tragic, the challenges of urban warfare make that regrettable result more understandable.

After all, acting in self-defense in such an environment against a terrorist organization pledged to destroy the Jewish state entirely contradicts the premise of Israel’s genocidal intent.

Often overlooked and underreported mitigating factors by Israel limiting non-combatant deaths include evacuation warnings before an attack, establishing humanitarian corridors, distributing vaccines, and providing unparalleled humanitarian relief.

These efforts provide definitive evidence that Israel’s intent is not to destroy Gaza’s civilian population, but to eliminate the authors of the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre, questioning Israel’s right even to exist.

Moreover, Hamas’s well-documented practice of embedding military assets, including armaments and leadership, within the civilian infrastructure in schools and hospitals has made injuries and deaths among innocents largely unavoidable.

That savage use of “human shields” has led to heartbreaking outcomes, but has also had the desired effect of obscuring Hamas’s barbarity by shifting genocidal blame onto the Israelis.

However, for those still believing that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, one needn’t look any further than Israel’s past attempts to offer Palestinians territory for statehood on five separate occasions.

The first two-state solution emerged in 1937, with a British plan for roughly an 80-20 split of territory, favoring the Arabs. Israelis accepted the division, but their approval was rejected.

A decade later, the British asked the newly formed United Nations to design a new land division plan, which the Israelis again endorsed but was again refused. As a likely result, the Six-Day War began in 1967 when Egypt, Syria, and Jordan again sought Israel’s destruction but were defeated.

Soon after, the Arab League announced that there would be no peace with Israel, no recognition of its lawful existence, and no negotiations with its leaders.

The fourth rejection of a two-state solution occurred in 2000, when Israel offered to relinquish all of Gaza and more than 94% of the West Bank. Predictably, that proposal was again declined.

And lastly, in 2007, Israel sought peace again by sweetening its earlier offer with additional land, but was again rebuffed.

So, dispassionately reviewing Middle East history, it’s absurd to insist that Israel has not repeatedly made good-faith efforts to broker peace with its Arab neighbors.

Furthermore, in offering Palestinians statehood in 1937, 1947, 1967, 2000, and 2007, it is equally unconvincing to seriously claim that Israel has made Palestinians stateless when, clearly, Palestinians have done that to themselves.

But since genocide is often defined as an explicit attempt to destroy an ethnic, racial, or religious group, how is it possible that if Israel were guilty of that in Gaza, several similarly populated Muslim-majority nations would have normalized relations with Israel by signing the Abraham Accords?

How is it possible that those nations, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Kazakhstan, all have Muslim populations of at least 70 percent, yet still chose to improve relations with Israel?

And how is it then possible that Saudi Arabia and Syria have also shown interest in joining the Abraham Accords, given that their populations are at least 90 percent Muslim?

So indisputably, Israeli military actions in Gaza are intended to defeat Hamas as an existential threat to their nation, not to genocidally destroy Palestinian Muslims as a group.

This is even more evident when realizing it is inconceivable that a people enduring the never-again horrors of genocide against themselves would commit the same atrocities against innocent others.

Genocidal intent is only possible when its targets are viewed as subhuman. And if that were so, why would Israel offer land to “less-than-human” Palestinians on numerous occasions and also embrace several Muslim nations through the Abraham Accords?

Such actions alone provide the best evidence that Israel is not committing genocide.

But unknowingly, those ignoring that confirmation are providing the best evidence of something else. And denials notwithstanding, that is their own thinly veiled smokescreen of anti-Semitism.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either d or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.