Genocide Isn’t Just a Word
The UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry (COI) on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel has issued a report concluding that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Frequented as the “crime of crimes”, genocide is a charge so grave that international bodies rarely apply it formally. For the UN to invoke the term is not symbolic rhetoric, but a legal judgment that carries massive moral and political weight. If the UN is calling it genocide, are we finally ready to confront the gravity of what is unfolding?
Raphael Lemkin, the man who first coined the term “genocide”, described it as acts carried out with the intent to destroy a people because of their national, ethnic, racial, or religious identity. ‘Intent’ is crucial — it separates genocide from the general brutality of war, and it is also the hardest thing to prove. After the Holocaust, the UN locked this definition into international law with the 1948 Genocide Convention, making genocide not just a moral evil, but a crime the world is legally bound to prevent and punish.
The UN’s Commission of Inquiry isn’t using the word genocide lightly. Their report points to mass civilian deaths and the deliberate destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure, as well as conditions that make survival nearly impossible, like the restriction of food, water, and medical aid. The Commission of Inquiry also flagged statements from Israeli officials that, in their view, reveal intent — the key to proving and punishing genocide. In the 72-page document, the evidence led the Commission to conclude that what is happening isn’t just another tragic chapter in an inhumane conflict: the actions of the Israeli government meet the legal threshold of genocide.
Israel has already rejected the UN’s findings, and allies like the United States have rushed to dispute the framing. But if every charge of genocide is brushed aside for political convenience, then the very system built to prevent another mass genocide collapses under its own weight. Whether one supports Israel or Palestine, the term genocide shouldn’t be treated as a political insult or reduced to a historical relic; it has a precise meaning. Too often, people assume genocide must look a certain way to “count”, but Lemkin’s definition was always broader than one historical tragedy. It covers the deliberate destruction of a people’s ability to live, and that is exactly what the UN says is happening in Gaza. Ignoring that finding doesn’t just fail Palestinians, it erodes the credibility of international law.
At its core, genocide is about more than mass killing; it’s about deliberately destroying a people’s ability to survive as who they are. Recognizing the UN’s findings is the bare minimum. The real question is whether the world will act on them, or once again allow legal principles to crumble under the pressure of politics.