Loading
  • 21 Aug, 2019

  • By, Wikipedia

Talk:Allegations Of Genocide In The 2023 Israeli Attack On Gaza

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

  • You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.


Attack type


Incorrect capitalization: Attack type: Rape -> Attack type: rape

I also think the word "others" should be removed from Attack type. It's unclear what it means and other articles on genocides (Holocaust, Armenian, Cambodian, Rwandan, Greek, Bosnian) don't use it. Bitspectator (talk) 19:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: capitalization done, please get another opinion for the others word. Bunnypranav (talk) 06:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will second the issue. I don't see the reason we are using the word. It reads to me as an "etc." without clarity if there is more or if it is just a catch-all in case something isn't listed. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Organize the Actions section

The Actions section looks to be all over the place. I propose creating some sections and then organizing the material accordingly:

Also, Israeli public reactions should be either moved to the section on intent, or the section on cultural discourse.VR (Please ping on reply) 15:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last few editors on this page, @David A, Selfstudier, Super Goku V, Bitspectator and Thebiguglyalien any thoughts? VR (Please ping on reply) 00:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I need to look more thoroughly when I get to a computer, but yeah, I think that section could benefit a lot by being organized by category. It is really all over the place. Those categories you suggest make sense. I'm surprised there isn't content on the destruction of cultural heritage. I'm pretty sure there would be RS linking that to the concept of Gaza genocide.Bitspectator ⛩️ 00:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do RS support a strong link between genocide, as defined in the 1948 convention, and destruction of cultural heritage? Please link me some sources.VR (Please ping on reply) 03:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wrong. It's a small part of the South African ICJ application though: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf (91.) Bitspectator ⛩️ 03:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond the obvious link between the destruction of cultural heritage and cultural genocide, there are a variety of sources (both popular RS and academic RS) that link the destruction of cultural heritage with genocide, some include:
  1. Targeting culture: The destruction of cultural heritage in conflict - House of Lords Library
  2. Cultural Heritage under Attack: Learning from History - Hermann Parzinger at Getty
  3. Cultural Heritage, Genocide, and Normative Agency - Davidavičiūtė, Journal of Applied Philosophy
  4. Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage, Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide: Towards an Evolutionary Interpretation of International Criminal Law - Lenzerini, europa ethnica
In relation to Palestine two that immediately come to mind are:
  1. Nakba Memoricide: Genocide Studies and the Zionist/Israeli Genocide of Palestine - Rashed & Short, Holy Land Studies
  2. Settler-Colonialism, Memoricide and Indigenous Toponymic Memory: The Appropriation of Palestinian Place Names by the Israeli State - Masalha, Holy Land and Palestine Studies
So, scholars believe these things can be linked. Now for us, of course, we need a source to link these in the context of Gaza post-2023. Articles from the Forum: Israel-Palestine: Atrocity Crimes and the Crisis of Holocaust and Genocide Studies by the Journal of Genocide Research may provide such citation, none jump out from memory though, I'll have a look if I have some time later. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only looked at five of the forum papers so far:
  1. Levene - No mention
  2. El-Affendi - No mention
  3. Semerdjian - "The blockade, coupled with the destruction of 70 per cent of Gaza’s housing stock, all its universities, and most of its hospitals, markets, and schools, removed life-sustaining infrastructure from the strip. After bombing its schools and hospitals, and killing more UN personnel than in any other conflict since its creation, a pending Israeli bill has declared UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) – the primary agency supporting Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank –a terrorist organization. This disastrous legislation, if passed, will criminalize the most effective aid distributor in the Occupied Territories, removing a Palestinian lifeline."
  4. Sultany - "Yet, a proper consideration of "the general context, the perpetration of other culpable acts systematically directed against the same group, the scale of atrocities committed, the systematic targeting of victims on account of their membership of a particular group, or the repetition of destructive and discriminatory acts" can reveal the genocidal nature of starvation in Gaza. In fact, the combination between starvation and the systematic destruction of hospitals, schools, and universities – and the killing of doctors, nurses, teachers, and academics who can provide health and education – can indicate the targeting of the three pillars of social existence and reproduction (subsistence, health, education)."
  5. Üngör - "Fifth, targeted attacks on cultural heritage such as the Gaza local archives, public and university libraries, bookshops, manuscript collections, ancient mosques, tombs, temples, bathhouses, museums, monasteries, churches, castles, cemeteries, and many archaeological sites erase the memory of Palestinian culture."
So some of the articles do mention the destruction of aspects of cultural heritage (this includes universities and other such educational institutes), with some specifically linking the destruction of cultural heritage to destruction of the group. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that improved organisation seems to be a good idea, yes. Thank you for helping out. David A (talk) 05:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like it is organized in a loose chronological order. That said, reorganization might make it clearer to read while improving flow. I would say that sub-section is a good plan. As for the reactions, I currently don't have an opinion on where the public reactions should be moved to. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS comments regarding the lead

I'm not interested in making a whole RfC out of this if there's no consensus, but the lead could use some improvements regarding MOS. First, having the first word of the lead be "experts" comes across as WP:WEASELy. While use of "experts" in the topic sentence is allowed per that guideline, it would be an improvement in this case to remove it or replace it with something more precise. "Legal scholars", "genocide scholars", and "Middle East scholars" appear later in the article, and while still not perfect, these or some variation would benefit the lead. I suggest something like Governments, United Nations agencies, non-governmental organisations, and legal scholars have accused...

Second, the lead seems disorganized, like it's in the wrong order. The paragraphs currently go:

  • Nature of accusations, then death statistics
  • Health statistics, blockade, then cultural destruction
  • Intent to destroy
  • ICJ

While there's no "perfect" order, I'm generally adverse to front-loading leads with statistics, and when reviewing articles, I've found that leads read better when general facts are above specific ones. The statistics portions are also smaller than the other aspects individually and could fit in one paragraph. I suggest moving a few sentences around so it goes:

  • Nature of accusations, then intent to destroy
  • Death statistics, then cultural destruction
  • Health statistics, then blockade
  • ICJ

The lead would then look like this:

Governments, United Nations agencies, non-governmental organisations, and legal experts have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people during its invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip in the ongoing Israel–Hamas war. Various observers, including United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, cited statements by senior Israeli officials that may indicate an "intent to destroy" (in whole or in part) Gaza's population, a necessary condition for the legal threshold of genocide to be met. A majority of mostly US-based Middle East scholars believed Israel's actions in Gaza were intended to make it uninhabitable for Palestinians, and 75% of them say Israel's actions in Gaza constitute either "major war crimes akin to genocide" or "genocide".

By mid-August 2024, after nine months of attacks, Israeli military action had resulted in over 40,000 confirmed Palestinian deaths—1 out of every 59 people in Gaza—averaging 148 deaths per day. Most of the victims are civilians, of whom at least 50% are women and children, and more than 100 journalists. Thousands more dead bodies are thought to be under the rubble of destroyed buildings. Israel has also destroyed numerous culturally significant buildings, including 13 libraries housing thousands of books, all of Gaza's 12 universities and 80% of its schools, dozens of mosques, three churches, and two museums.

By June 2024, over 500 healthcare workers in Gaza had been killed. As of August 2024, only 17 of Gaza's 36 hospitals were partially functional; 84% of health centers in the region have been destroyed or suffered damage. An enforced Israeli blockade heavily contributed to starvation and the threat of famine in the Gaza Strip, while Israeli forces prevented humanitarian supplies from reaching the Palestinian population, blocking or attacking humanitarian convoys. Early in the conflict, Israel cut off water and electricity supply from the Gaza Strip.

The government of South Africa has instituted proceedings, South Africa v. Israel, against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging a violation of the Genocide Convention. In an initial ruling, the ICJ held that South Africa was entitled to bring its case against Israel, while Palestinians were recognised to have "a plausible right to be protected from genocide" that faced a real risk of irreparable damage. The court ordered Israel to observe its obligations under the Genocide Convention by taking all measures within its power to prevent the commission of acts of genocide, to prevent and punish incitement to genocide, and to allow basic humanitarian services into Gaza. The court also later ordered Israel to increase humanitarian aid into Gaza and to prevent genocidal acts during the Rafah offensive. The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic.

I believe this flows much better, but I'm interested in hearing other thoughts. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think your reordering and reasoning is good. I would support changing the lead to what you've suggested. As you brought it up, I reflected on the opening sentence for a few minutes. If you don't mind a discussion on just the first sentence here:
I think "non-governmental organisations" is vague. Especially considering the line also includes governments. Governments and non-governments accuse X of Y? What groups exactly are being referred to? NGOs can be political, partisan, or advocacy groups. I wonder if this should be changed to "human rights organisations", or similar. Bitspectator ⛩️ 22:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I reordered it because that makes sense. Can do further editing as needed from there? Selfstudier (talk) 09:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that this makes sense and makes this article more properly structured and encyclopaedic. Thank you for helping out. David A (talk) 20:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something of interest to add to this page

To quote:

"Since the October 7 attack, Israel's right-wing Channel 14 has broadcast over 50 statements by presenters, panelists, and guests advocating or defending genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and more than 150 calls for war crimes and crimes against humanity, according to a report published Tuesday by an Israeli newspaper.

Haaretz reported that the Israeli human rights groups—Zulat for Equality and Human Rights, Hatzlacha: Movement for the Promotion of a Fair Society, and the Democratic Bloc—have compiled a list of genocidal statements and incitements to war crimes made by individuals appearing on Channel 14 since October 7."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/channel-14-israel

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-09-24/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israels-channel-14-has-repeatedly-called-for-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/00000192-1f2e-d515-a1fa-5f3e99550000

David A (talk) 12:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Common Dreams is RS? I had no idea. And who are these presenters, panelists and guests? I'm seeing a TV presenter, a "former lawmaker" and a singer...nobody involved in policymaking or representing the government or IDF. And it is interesting that no one in mainstream Western media has said a word about this genocide. Jonathan f1 (talk) 00:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that this tv channel has been proven to systematically incite the Israeli population with genocidal rhetoric. David A (talk) 05:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the case of Hassan Ngeze, it is possible for those outside the government to be convicted of incitement to genocide. So, if the article has a section on incitement, and RS are conducting investigations and analyses of potential incitement, then such analyses could be added. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 07:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David A Thanks. Haaretz is an excellent source. The matter would warrant a mention either in the context of incitement or in the context of media coverage. Andreas JN466 11:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added: [1] Andreas JN466 12:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for helping out. David A (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that settles it. Jonathan f1 (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]