Association of Genocide Scholars Says Israel’s Actions in Gaza ‘Meet Legal Definition of Genocide’

The International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) on Aug. 31 adopted a resolution concluding that Israel’s “policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide,” asserting that measures taken since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack have targeted the broader Gazan population as well as the militant group.

Citing Article II of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the resolution said Israel’s response had “not only been directed against Hamas but have also targeted the entire Gazan population,” and accused the Israeli government of “systematic and widespread crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, including indiscriminate and deliberate attacks against the civilians and civilian infrastructure.” The IAGS resolution also alleged that Israel had forcibly displaced nearly all of the 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza.

The IAGS is a scholarly association composed of academics and researchers who study genocide and related forms of mass violence. Its resolutions are academic and advocacy statements rather than legal rulings; the organization framed its findings around the legal definition contained in the Genocide Convention and presented evidence and argument to support its conclusion.

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejected the resolution. Spokesperson Oren Marmorstein called the finding “an embarrassment to the legal profession and to any academic standard,” and said it was “entirely based on Hamas’ campaign of lies and the laundering of those lies by others,” according to a ministry statement.

The resolution and Israel’s response come amid sustained international scrutiny of the conduct of hostilities in Gaza and of the humanitarian situation there. The IAGS pointed to what it described as a pattern of actions that went beyond targeting armed actors and military objectives, and said those actions met the elements set out in Article II of the Genocide Convention, which defines prohibited acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

The IAGS did not bring a criminal case; its resolution is intended to assess whether documented policies and practices meet the legal definition of genocide and to urge relevant legal and political bodies to consider those findings. Determinations of criminal liability and state responsibility are in the remit of national courts, international tribunals and the United Nations system.

Humanitarian agencies and rights organizations have reported mass displacement, civilian casualties and severe damage to civilian infrastructure in Gaza since October 2023. Governments and international institutions have varied in their responses, with some calling for investigations into possible violations of international humanitarian law and others offering diplomatic and political support to Israel’s security rationale for its operations following the Hamas attack.

Legal scholars and practitioners who study genocide law typically assess three core elements: prohibited acts such as killing or causing serious bodily or mental harm; a protected group defined by nationality, ethnicity, race or religion; and specific intent to destroy that group in whole or in part. The IAGS resolution asserts that those elements are present in the case of Gaza, while Israeli officials dispute both the factual basis and the legal characterization.

The resolution is likely to shape debate among academics, human rights advocates and policy makers, and could intensify calls for investigations by domestic or international bodies. Any such proceedings would require distinct legal processes and evidentiary standards to determine criminal responsibility or state culpability.

The IAGS vote adds to a series of public assessments by nonstate bodies and advocacy groups alleging serious violations in the Gaza conflict. Those assessments vary in legal formality and consequence. The United Nations and other international institutions have previously initiated inquiries or called for independent investigations into conduct by parties to the conflict; outcomes of those processes have differed depending on mandate, methodology and political backing.

In its statement accompanying the resolution, the IAGS said it had reviewed available evidence and concluded that the cumulative conduct met the statutory criteria for genocide under international law. The association urged competent international and domestic judicial authorities to open inquiries and pursue accountability mechanisms.

Israeli officials have maintained that their military operations are aimed at degrading Hamas’s capabilities and preventing future attacks, and they have rejected allegations that their actions constitute deliberate targeting of civilians or amount to genocide. International legal experts note that assessing claims of genocide requires careful analysis of intent, which is often difficult to prove and generally lies at the heart of judicial determinations.

The resolution and the rebuttal from Israel underscore persistent divisions in international responses to the Gaza war, reflecting differing legal interpretations, political stances and evidentiary assessments. Observers say that the debates are likely to continue in academic, legal and diplomatic forums as more evidence is collected and as calls for independent investigations persist.