By Lara Kajs
Dispatches from the Field—The Genocide Report
Washington, DC—10 April 2025
The escalation of violence following the 7 October 2023 attacks has intensified legal and policy scrutiny of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the West Bank. What began as a military response to Hamas has evolved into a broader conflict marked by large-scale civilian harm, displacement, and destruction of critical infrastructure. As conditions on the ground have deteriorated, allegations of genocide and ethnic cleansing have entered formal legal proceedings and international policy debate, raising complex questions about intent, proportionality, and accountability under international law.
Since the escalation of violence in October 2023, allegations that Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the West Bank may constitute genocide and ethnic cleansing have moved from advocacy spaces into formal legal and policy discourse. These claims are now being examined through international legal frameworks, including proceedings before the International Court of Justice, alongside growing documentation of civilian harm, displacement, and restrictions on humanitarian access.
The current legal scrutiny reflects not only the scale of civilian harm, but the growing centrality of intent, conduct, and accountability in assessing potential atrocity crimes.”
Legal Definitions and Thresholds
Genocide, as defined under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, requires the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group. This includes acts such as killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about a group’s destruction.
Ethnic cleansing, while not codified as a standalone crime, is widely recognized in international jurisprudence as the forced removal of a population from a territory. Depending on context and intent, such actions may constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity, or acts of genocide.
A central challenge in legal analysis is the requirement to establish specific intent. In practice, intent may be inferred from patterns of conduct, the scale of destruction, and official statements by state actors.
Gaza: Civilian Harm and Destruction of Infrastructure
The scale of civilian harm in Gaza has drawn sustained international concern. According to United Nations reporting and health authorities in Gaza, tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed since October 2023, with a significant proportion identified as women and children.
Widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure—including hospitals, schools, and water systems—has raised legal questions regarding proportionality, distinction, and the protection of objects indispensable to civilian survival under international humanitarian law.
Israeli authorities have consistently stated that military operations are directed at dismantling Hamas. However, statements by senior officials have been cited in legal proceedings as potential indicators relevant to assessing intent. These factors have been central to arguments presented in ongoing international litigation.
West Bank: Displacement and Territorial Fragmentation
Parallel to developments in Gaza, the West Bank has experienced increased violence, displacement, and settlement expansion. Reports from international organizations and human rights monitors document patterns of home demolitions, settler violence, and the forced movement of Palestinian communities, particularly in Area C.
These dynamics have contributed to legal arguments that cumulative policies and practices may amount to forced population transfer. Under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the forcible transfer of protected populations is prohibited and may constitute a grave breach. In certain contexts, such conduct may also meet the threshold for crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute.
International Legal Proceedings and Accountability
Legal scrutiny of the conflict has intensified through proceedings before international courts. In January 2024, the International Court of Justice determined that claims brought by South Africa alleging violations of the Genocide Convention were plausible and issued provisional measures requiring Israel to prevent acts that could fall within the scope of the Convention and to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance.
Separately, the International Criminal Court has initiated proceedings related to alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. Arrest warrants issued in November 2024 target senior Israeli leadership, citing allegations including the deprivation of essential resources and the targeting of civilians. These proceedings focus on individual criminal responsibility and operate independently from the state-level adjudication taking place at the ICJ.
Together, these legal processes underscore the increasing role of international judicial mechanisms in assessing conduct during armed conflict and determining accountability for potential atrocity crimes.
Implications for International Law and Policy
The convergence of large-scale civilian harm, displacement, and ongoing legal proceedings has placed significant pressure on the international legal system. The determination of whether legal thresholds for genocide or crimes against humanity have been met will carry substantial implications for state responsibility, international partnerships, and the enforcement of global norms.
Beyond the immediate case, the situation represents a broader test of the credibility and effectiveness of international legal institutions in responding to allegations of mass atrocity. The extent to which legal findings translate into enforcement will shape future expectations for accountability in armed conflict.
Photo Credit: Gaza War 2023 — 2025: IMG 3821 by Jabar Jehad Baldwin. Licensed under CC BY SA 4.0
Atrocity Prevention Lens
The situation in Gaza and the West Bank reflects multiple indicators associated with elevated atrocity risk, including large-scale civilian harm, restrictions on humanitarian access, and patterns of displacement. The interaction between military operations and civilian infrastructure has intensified vulnerabilities, particularly where essential services such as food, water, and healthcare are disrupted.
Atrocity prevention frameworks emphasize the importance of early warning, documentation, and sustained monitoring of both conduct and rhetoric. The presence of ongoing legal proceedings provides an additional mechanism for scrutiny, but prevention efforts depend on timely diplomatic engagement, protection of humanitarian access, and adherence to international legal standards. Without coordinated intervention, prolonged conflict conditions may increase the likelihood of further escalation and civilian harm.
Legal Framework
Genocide Convention (1948)
The Convention defines genocide and obligates states to prevent and punish acts committed with the intent to destroy protected groups. It establishes both state responsibility and the duty to act when credible risk emerges.
Fourth Geneva Convention
This framework governs the protection of civilians during armed conflict and prohibits forcible transfer, collective punishment, and attacks on civilian infrastructure. Violations may constitute grave breaches and trigger international accountability mechanisms.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
The Rome Statute defines war crimes and crimes against humanity, including persecution, forcible transfer, and starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. It provides the legal basis for individual criminal responsibility.
Customary International Humanitarian Law
Customary law reinforces principles of distinction, proportionality, and necessity, binding all parties to conflict regardless of treaty ratification. Violations of these principles may constitute war crimes.
About TGR
The Genocide Report (TGR) publishes analysis and educational resources on conflict, international law, and atrocity prevention. Its work seeks to bridge academic research, field realities, and public understanding of mass violence and civilian protection.
About the Author
Lara Kajs is the founder and executive director of The Genocide Report, a Washington, DC-based educational nonprofit focused on atrocity prevention and international law. She is the author of several field-based books on conflict, displacement, humanitarian crises, and international humanitarian law, drawing on extensive research and field experience in Yemen, Syria, and Afghanistan. Her writing and public speaking focus on atrocity crimes, forced displacement, the protection of civilians, and the legal frameworks governing armed conflict.