Benderski in essay 'The Genocide That Wasn’t,' points out that labeling Israel’s war in Gaza as “genocide” misuses and weakens the meaning of the term. The author reminds that Israel’s actions, while destructive, lacked the defining intent to exterminate a people. He points to Israel celebrating the war’s end, engaging in negotiations, issuing evacuation warnings, and pausing fighting for hostage exchanges as behavior inconsistent with historical genocides.
The piece points out that Hamas’s tactics—embedding fighters and infrastructure among civilians and operating extensive tunnel networks—made civilian casualties difficult to avoid in a densely populated environment. While acknowledging the immense suffering, destruction, displacement, and loss of life in Gaza, these outcomes do not by themselves prove genocidal intent.
Citing international law and the International Court of Justice’s Bosnia v. Serbia ruling, the essay contends that genocide requires clear evidence that extermination is the only reasonable explanation for a state’s actions. No such proof exists in Gaza.
The essay concludes that the war should instead be understood as a brutal asymmetrical conflict marked by excess, tragedy, and moral failure, but not genocide. It warns that overusing the term “genocide” risks stripping it of its historical and moral significance. "Perhaps, in the end, the only genocide committed here was against the meaning of the word itself."
'The Genocide That Wasn’t.'
Leo Benderski. Times Of Israel. Oct 18, 2025
From the blog of Leo Benderski at The Times of Israel
blogs.timesofisrael.com
