Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s decision to name a military unit after a World War II-era militia infamous for massacring Poles and Jews has led to a sharp spike in tensions between Kyiv and Warsaw. June 7, 2026 Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) attends the reburial ceremony of Andriy Melnyk, who died in 1964 and was the leader of a branch of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), along with his wife Sofia, at the National Military Memorial Cemetery near Kyiv on May 25, 2026. © Genya Savilov, AFP Some things are better off staying buried. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a presidential decree on May 26 bestowing the honourary title of “Heroes of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army”, or UPA, on an elite unit of the nation’s special forces. As the armed wing of the far-right Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), the UPA carved out a gruesome name for itself in the shifting borderlands between Poland and Ukraine during World War II. It remains infamous in Poland for its role in the massacres of ethnic Poles and Jews in Volhynia and eastern Galicia – massacres that Polish historians believe killed tens of thousands of civilians, and that the Polish state considers part of a deliberate campaign of genocide. Zelensky’s decree was all the more striking for having the uneasy makings of a pattern. The day before, the Jewish president had presided over the reburial of the repatriated remains of Andriy Melnyk in the national military ceremony near Kyiv. Melnyk, who died in Germany in 1964 and had been buried in Luxembourg, was the leader of a branch of the OUN – and a staunch advocate for collaboration between the Ukrainian nationalist movement and Nazi Germany and its fascist allies. Melnyk now lies buried with full state honours alongside Ukrainian soldiers killed during the four-year struggle against the Russian invasion, hailed as a national hero by the same Zelensky who once spoke proudly of his own grandfather’s fight against the genocidal Nazi regime in the ranks of the Red Army. Zelensky’s decree was all the more striking for having the uneasy makings of a pattern. The day before, the Jewish president had presided over the reburial of the repatriated remains of Andriy Melnyk in the national military ceremony near Kyiv. Melnyk, who died in Germany in 1964 and had been buried in Luxembourg, was the leader of a branch of the OUN – and a staunch advocate for collaboration between the Ukrainian nationalist movement and Nazi Germany and its fascist allies. Melnyk now lies buried with full state honours alongside Ukrainian soldiers killed during the four-year struggle against the Russian invasion, hailed as a national hero by the same Zelensky who once spoke proudly of his own grandfather’s fight against the genocidal Nazi regime in the ranks of the Red Army. Under strain The president’s actions have been met with shock across the border in Poland. Former Polish president Lech Walesa, who had led the Solidarity trade union movement that brought down the Soviet-backed Communist government in Poland at the close of the Cold War, said on social media that he had wrenched the Ukrainian flag badge from his chest upon hearing of the decree. While he said he would continue to support Ukraine’s fight against Moscow, he would not – could not – support its president. Left-wing former prime minister Leszek Miller described the decree as akin to Germany renaming a military unit after the Nazis’ Einsatzgruppen death squads. And conservative President Karol Nawrocki called for the Ukrainian president to be stripped of the Order of the White Eagle, the nation’s highest state honour that was bestowed on Zelensky by Nawrocki’s predecessor Andrzej Duda in the wake of the Russian onslaught. "Glorifying the UPA has provided Russian propaganda with plenty of fuel for disinformation," he said. Russian President Vladimir Putin has long justified his assault on Ukraine in part as a campaign to "de-Nazify" the country. An open wound The legacy of the fierce partisan fighting between Polish and Ukrainian forces remains an open wound between the two countries. Anita Prazmowska, emeritus professor of international history at the London School of Economics and Political Science, said that the roots of the conflict could be traced back at least to Polish independence in the wake of World War I. Following the collapse of the German, Russian and Habsburg Empires that had carved the country up between them, a newly independent Poland drove back an advance by the nascent Soviet Union and staked out territories that included a substantial Ukrainian minority in the eastern borderlands. “During the inter-war period, the attitude of the new Polish state towards the Ukrainian minority was profoundly negative,” Prazmowska said. “Essentially, the attitude was that Ukrainians are not mature enough to form a state, that they are Slavs, yet not [Slavs] – essentially, that they should be incorporated in the Polish state.” As Nazi and Soviet troops poured into Poland in 1939 under the terms of their non-aggression pact, many Ukrainian nationalists who had long fought a clandestine fight for independence became willing collaborators with the Nazis. The twin wings of the OUN, led by Melnyk and his more radical rival Stepan Bandera, saw Hitler’s Third Reich as a force powerful enough to prise an independent Ukrainian state from Moscow and Warsaw – one swept clean of Jews, Poles and Russians. “During the Second World War, Nazi Germany made use of the Ukrainian nationalists as foreign levies, and therefore exploited the very strong desire for independence in the Ukrainian community to draw them into policing – and policing the ghettos in particular,” Prazmowska said. “Later, the levies who were brought into the Waffen-SS were brought in to [deal with] the [1944] Warsaw Uprising, where they distinguished themselves with their extreme brutality.” 'A defiant gesture' Founded by the OUN after Hitler’s forces stormed into the Soviet Union, the UPA variously fought against Soviet, Nazi and Polish Resistance forces as it became clear that an independent Ukraine had no place in the Fuhrer’s plans to cleanse Eastern Europe for a new generation of German colonists. As the Red Army drove the Nazi war machine back, the UPA launched a desperate campaign to cleanse the borderlands of their Polish communities – what Warsaw now describes as a genocide. “Zelensky ... honoured certain people who had been involved in those activities – elevating them to positions of Ukrainian nationalists, Ukrainian heroes,” Prazmowska said. “And that's not how the Poles see them.” This is not the history of the UPA as it is understood in much of Ukraine. Lesia Bidochko, a senior lecturer at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, said that Zelensky’s actions fit into the country’s efforts to forge a common narrative of the country’s long march towards independence. “From a historical standpoint, some of the figures being heroised in contemporary Ukraine are genuinely contested. Their significance is less historical than symbolic – most people simply do not engage deeply with the history itself,” she said. “What matters to many people is that these figures annoy Russia. They serve as a defiant gesture. This emotional and political significance often overshadows the more detailed aspects of the historical record.” Ukraine’s now four-year struggle against Russia’s advance has sharpened nationalist appetites for the public celebration of figures who fought for the country’s independence – though sometimes under the same blood-and-soil banner that unleashed some of the worst horrors of the twentieth century. “There is a demand within parts of Ukrainian society for a rehabilitation of historical memory,” Bidochko said. “Ukrainian authorities have been responsive to that demand – unofficially framing it within a decolonisation discourse.” 'The first step' With Ukraine still struggling to mobilise the troops it needs to the front despite widening conscription, the idea that Zelensky would extend further support to an intensely motivated – and ideologically hardline – minority within the country might make some sense. The far-right Azov movement, which has steadily grown in influence throughout parts of Ukraine's military since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion, has campaigned heavily for the public rehabilitation of ultranationalist figures. Whatever the reasoning, Melnyk will likely not be the last of his nationalist compatriots to find his way back to his native soil. The remains of OUN leader Yevgen Konovalets, who was killed by a Soviet agent in Rotterdam in 1938, will also be brought back to Ukraine for burial. Local media have also reported that Kyiv is campaigning for the return of Bandera, whose remains are currently buried in a Munich grave. "Now is only the first step," Zelensky said during the ceremony. "I am grateful to every person who worked so that the return of great Ukrainian figures could happen and so that the Ukrainian people would receive their pantheon of heroes," he added. © 2026 Copyright France 24

A severely malnourished girl in Gaza. © WHO Israel’s Twelve Tactics of Denial By Dr. Gregory H. Stanton and the Genocide Watch Taskforce on Gaza (first published May 2025, updated June 2026) Introduction Israel was founded after the Holocaust as a nation-state where Jews could have a homeland and defend themselves. However, the territory granted to Israel was already occupied by Palestinians as well as Jews. UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947 partitioned Palestine and designated part of it as the new state of Israel. Votes by the United States, France, the Soviet Union and their allies passed the resolution by 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions. Eight Muslim UN members, India and Cuba opposed the resolution. The UK, China, and eight other states abstained. Arab and other Muslim states rejected the creation of Israel because its territory was taken from part of Palestine. 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from Israel under pressure from Zionist paramilitaries or Israeli military forces. Dozens of massacres targeted Palestinians and 600 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Most of the 700,000 Palestinians resettled in refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and especially the Gaza Strip. Neighboring Arab states have fought four major wars to destroy Israel since 1948. They have sponsored thousands of acts of terrorism against Israeli citizens. Hamas, Iran, and Hezbollah have fired thousands of missiles into Israel, killing hundreds of Israeli civilians. In 2025, only ten Muslim nations recognize Israel: Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Turkey, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Eritrea, Senegal, Chad, and Burkina Faso. Twenty Muslim nations have never recognized or established diplomatic relations with Israel: Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Oman, Djibouti, Somalia, Comoros, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Cuba and Iran withdrew their recognition. Nine countries have recognized but have broken bilateral relations with Israel. THE HAMAS GENOCIDAL MASSACRE OCTOBER 7, 2023 Hamas is a genocidal terrorist organization. Hamas and its supporters like Iran deny the Holocaust and openly declare their intention to destroy Israel and exterminate Jews. They have openly stated that destruction of Israel is their goal. In the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust on October 7, 2023, Hamas and Islamic Jihad massacred over 1200 Israelis in the area adjoining Gaza. They took 251 hostages. Most were Israelis. Five were American citizens.148 have been rescued or released, 82 have been confirmed killed in captivity. At least 36 of these were murdered by Hamas. Many hostages were starved, tortured, raped, and kept in cramped underground tunnels for weeks. THE DEEP STRUCTURE OF ISRAEL'S RESPONSE Three deep structural foundations of Israel’s response to the October 7, 2023 massacre underlie the motivations for Israel’s destruction of Gaza and Israel’s denial that it is committing genocide. They are Holocaust Prevention, Israel’s Divine Destiny, and Self-Defense. HOLOCAUST PREVENTION: Hamas must be defeated to prevent another Holocaust. The Holocaust exterminated six million Jews. As the new nation legally created by the United Nations to be a homeland for Jews after the Holocaust, Israel’s primary national duty is to protect Jews. That priority outweighs all other national purposes. “Never Again” is the ultimate justification for Israel’s self-defense against the Arab nations that have tried to destroy Israel in four major wars. It is the motivation for Israel’s retaliation against the relentless genocidal terrorism of Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Black September, the Palestine Liberation Organization and other adversaries determined to destroy the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. ISRAEL’S DIVINE DESTINY: God gave Jewish people Judah and Israel, including Gaza and West Bank. Many Zionists believe that the nation of Israel was granted to the Jewish people by God. They trace this faith to the promises made by God in the Torah, the sacred Hebrew scriptures. The Torah affirms that Jews have a divine right to live in Israel. The original borders of Israel included ancient Judah and Israel before the Roman Empire expelled the Jewish people from their God-given homeland. Those ancient Jewish territories included Gaza and the West Bank. Jewish settlers in the West Bank claim that they are only re-settling areas that belong to Jews by divine right. They assert an Israeli “divine destiny,” much like the “manifest destiny” that European settlers of the Americas claimed. A similar divine destiny was claimed by some American colonialists, who believed that God gave them the right to conquer the Americas, drive native Americans off their land, and rule over America’s indigenous peoples. The most recent expression of this creed is “Christian nationalism.” Ultra-Zionist Jews claim they have a God-given right to occupy Gaza and the West Bank. They assert their divine right to conquer Palestinians, bring all of ancient Judah and Israel within Israel’s borders, and defend Jewish settlements within those borders. This divine justification for Israel’s expansion is often found among the 700,000 Jewish settlers who now occupy Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Some settlers consider this “divine destiny” to be a powerful justification for conquest and forced deportation of Palestinians. In the Gaza war, it has become a justification for genocide. Many other Israelis believe it, as well. An independent poll conducted in January 2025 showed that seventy percent of Israelis support annexation of “Judea and Samaria” (the West Bank) into Israel and oppose establishment of a Palestinian state there. A majority of Israelis oppose a “two-state solution” to the conflict. However, Israeli support for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies is far from monolithic. Some Israeli groups advocate redirecting Israeli government policies away from destroying Hamas in Gaza to stopping the war, returning Israeli hostages, and making peace with Palestinians. SELF-DEFENSE: Israel has a right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. With the justification of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Israel’s invasions in Gaza and Lebanon were intended to destroy the bases of Hamas and Hezbollah before they could be used for more attacks on Israel. Israel also justifies its invasion of Gaza as necessary to free Israeli citizens who are being held hostage. This right to protect national citizens has long been a doctrine of international law. Prime Minister Netanyahu justifies killing Hamas terrorists as necessary to protect Israeli lives and the lives of other civilized people in the Middle East. Israel’s self-defense is necessary to defeat Hamas and protect the Jewish homeland. Netanyahu’s logic is utilitarian. Killing Hamas terrorists is necessary to prevent them from murdering more Israelis. This moral logic removes the ethical conflict between killing and protecting life. It relieves responsibility for the war from Israelis and Israel’s supporters. The western world has largely sided with Israel in its war to destroy Hamas. The European Union, the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, Canada, and most South American nations have accepted Israel’s assertion of its right to self-defense. However, except for the United States, all members of the UN Security Council have condemned Israel's continuing starvation and destruction of Gaza. Israel and its allies consider self-defense to be a legitimate justification for Israel’s response to the mass murder, rape, and other acts of genocide perpetrated by Hamas on October 7, 2023. Has Israel’s retaliation against Hamas for its 7 October 2023 genocidal massacre been in accord with international law? If Israel had invaded Gaza only to hunt down the perpetrators of the October 7 Hamas attack, it could claim proportionate retaliation under the laws of war. Instead of invading Gaza and flooding or attacking Hamas in its tunnels, Israel has bombed all of Gaza and attacked the entire Palestinian population. [Flooding the tunnels was rejected because it would also drown Israeli hostages.] Israel’s bombing has destroyed Gaza so completely that almost no habitable dwellings remain. Israel’s retaliation has gone far beyond any possible interpretation of international law. Israeli bombing has killed over 62,000 Palestinians. Israel has not limited its bombing to Hamas combatants. It has bombed the entire civilian population of Gaza. Israel has destroyed 92 percent of housing units and 70 percent of all structures in Gaza. It has targeted hospitals, maternity clinics, feeding centers, refugee camps, medical and relief personnel. Israel blocked all food aid to Gaza for over seventy days after Israel ended its ceasefire with Hamas. The blockade has resulted in acute malnutrition and starvation among children. The UN has called such withholding of food “cruel collective punishment.” Starvation is a war crime under the 4th Geneva Convention Article 23 to which Israel and 195 other nations are state parties. Starvation is also a war crime under Article 70 of Optional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and Art. 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Starvation constitutes the crimes against humanity of persecution under Article 7 (1)(h) and extermination under 7(2)(b) of the ICC Statute. It is an act of genocide under Genocide Convention Article 2(c) and Rome Statute Article 6(c). Is Israel committing genocide in Gaza? Genocide Watch has concluded that Israel has committed all five acts of genocide enumerated in the Genocide Convention. Israel’s war and destruction of the Palestinian population of Gaza exemplifies all ten stages of genocide. Please read Genocide Watch’s careful analysis of the conclusive evidence of genocide by Israel in our report: Genocide is Never Justifiable. The Panel of Experts in International Law convened by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, UN Special Rapporteurs convened by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Genocide Watch, and other reputable human rights organizations have also concluded that Israel is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza. Israel’s Denial: Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Israeli cabinet, the Israeli press, and Israel’s allies deny that Israel’s carpet bombing, blockade of food, and destruction of hospitals, maternity centers, and fertility facilities in Gaza constitute genocide, the intentional destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian ethnic and national group. The rhetorical strategies of denialism are evidence of genocidal intent. This report documents each of the tactics of denial used by Israel. The report is based on statements by Israeli leaders, the Israeli press, and Israel’s defenders. Israel’s denialism illustrates all twelve tactics of denial outlined by Dr. Israel Charny and summarized by Dr. Gregory Stanton in his essay, Twelve Ways to Deny a Genocide. The Twelve Tactics of Israel’s Denial 1. Minimize deaths. All statistics from Hamas or the UN are exaggerations. 2. Attack truth-tellers. Critics are “antisemitic”, liars, or Hamas sympathizers. 3. Deny intent. Civilian deaths are unintentional “collateral damage” in self-defense. 4. Dehumanization. Palestinians are “animals” who support terrorism and genocide. 5. Blame Ancient Conflict. The war continues ethnic conflict since Biblical times. 6. Blame mistakes. Civilian deaths are mistakes, accidents, or acts against orders. 7. Claim appeasement. Critics are appeasing Hamas killers, rapists, and genocidists. 8. Justify arming Israel. Arming Israel is legal. It supports Israel’s self-defense. 9. Claim good treatment. Palestinians are treated well and receive enough food. 10. Legalism. Israel’s attacks don’t fit the legal definition of genocide. 11. Blame the victims. Hamas terrorism justifies defense of Israel’s Jewish people. 12. Peace trumps justice. Making peace outweighs justice for genocide. 1. MINIMIZE DEATHS: All statistics from Hamas or the UN are exaggerations. Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed over 62,000 Palestinians, including over 17,000 children. Hamas says the real figure is far higher due to thousands of Gaza residents who are missing, buried under the rubble of destroyed buildings, and presumed dead. Israel claims that half of those killed in Gaza were combatants. Independent experts say that only 25% were combatants. In addition to misrepresenting the number of Palestinian civilians killed in Israel’s assault on Gaza, Israeli officials routinely blame the high number of civilian casualties on the actions of Hamas. They deny that Israel has intentionally targeted civilians. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman Peter Lerner said after an Israeli offensive that killed 274 Palestinians, “Every civilian life lost in this war is a result of how Hamas has operated.” Israeli officials question all statistics on Palestinian deaths provided by the Hamas Health Ministry, citing Hamas’ monopoly control over Gaza. They claim that all Hamas statistics are dishonest exaggerations of Palestinian fatalities for Hamas propaganda purposes. 2. ATTACK TRUTH-TELLERS: Critics are “antisemitic”, liars, or Hamas sympathizers. In response to international backlash against Israel’s assault on Gaza, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israeli officials accuse critics of “antisemitism” and support for anti-Israel Hamas terrorism. They claim that the United Nations and UNRWA, the UN agency supporting Palestinian refugees, support Hamas. Addressing the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu stated “Until this antisemitic swamp is drained, the UN will be viewed by fair-minded people everywhere as nothing more than a contemptuous farce.” Israel has accused UNRWA workers of supporting terrorism and involvement in the Hamas October 7, 2023 attack. Israel has ignored the findings of the United Nations investigation into Israel’s accusations against UNRWA. The UN investigation found evidence that only nine UNRWA employees were assisting Hamas. The UN immediately fired them. Israel ignores this decisive UN response because Israel’s narrative portrays the UN as uniformly opposed to Israel. Since the ICC charged Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant with war crimes, articles in Israeli and US conservative media have noted that the ICC charges were brought after ICC Prosecutor Khan learned he would be investigated for non-consensual sexual misconduct with an ICC staffer. These attempts to discredit the charges brought by the ICC ignore the fact that the charges were approved by the ICC’s Pretrial Chamber before any accusations of misconduct against ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan were made. It is true that antisemitism is a real threat to Jews and is on the rise globally. The reality of antisemitism and its impact on Jews is deplorable. However, accusations by Israeli leaders that the UN, ICC, human rights groups, and other critics of Israel are “antisemitic” remain unproven. Genocide Watch, for example, has a consistent record of vigorous opposition to all forms of antisemitism. Genocide Watch’s stalwart support for Israel’s legitimate right to exist and its self-defense against terrorism and eliminationism by Iran, Arab, and other Muslim states is strong. Yet Genocide Watch’s careful legal analysis has concluded that Israel is committing genocide. 3. DENY INTENT: Civilian deaths are unintentional “collateral damage” in self-defense. Israel blames the high numbers of civilian casualties in Gaza on Hamas, arguing that Hamas combatants use civilians as human shields. Israel claims its Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) take all necessary precautions to diminish the toll on civilian life. Hamas fighters hide among Palestinian civilians, making civilian deaths unavoidable. Israel claims the number of civilian deaths is proportionate to the difficulty of defeating Hamas terrorists hiding among the Gaza population. In response to these Israeli claims, UN observers note that most of the precautions Israeli officials point to are evacuation orders. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OCHA, reports that over 80% of residents in the Gaza Strip are under evacuation orders. The IDF says these evacuation orders are due to Hamas military activity within humanitarian zones. UN observers respond that evacuation orders have not prevented the disproportionate killing of civilians. The evacuation orders also contribute to the massive displacement of Palestinians and the overcrowding of designated “humanitarian zones.” 4. DEHUMANIZATION: Palestinians are "animals" who support terrorism and genocide. The history of the conflict between Israel and Palestine has been marked by xenophobia, racism and dehumanization. The dehumanization has been characteristic of both sides. Israel claims that destruction of Gaza and resulting civilian casualties are a necessary and justifiable cost of the Israeli effort to defeat and destroy the terrorist group Hamas. Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant claim that there are “no innocents” among Palestinians. They deny any distinction between Hamas combatants and Palestinian civilians. Israel’s former U.N. ambassador Dan Gillerman described Palestinians as "inhuman animals". Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced a “total siege” of Gaza, cutting off water, food, and electricity. Gallant referred to Palestinians as “human animals.” The dehumanization of Palestinians has included: · Denying most Palestinians Israeli citizenship. · Refusing to recognize Palestinians’ property rights in Israel and the West Bank. · Supporting confiscation of Palestinian land to build Israeli settlements in the West Bank. · Requiring Palestinians working in Israel to endure long border checks and carry permits, reminiscent of the passes South African blacks had to carry during apartheid. · Bulldozing Palestinian homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank. · Cutting off food to Gaza, causing malnutrition and deaths of Palestinian children. · Destroying most hospitals and maternity centers in Gaza. Israel’s supporters slander critics of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. They are vilified as "immoral", "antisemitic" "sympathizers with terrorists". 5. BLAME ANCIENT CONFLICT. The war continues ethnic conflict since Biblical times. Israeli officials have explained massive Palestinian civilian casualties and the destruction of Gaza as the inevitable continuation of the ancient conflict between the Jews of Israel and the ancestors of Palestinians, the Amelekites, who also lived in Gaza. On October 28, 2023, three weeks after October 7, Netanyahu equated Israel’s response to the Hamas genocide with Israel’s response to the Amalekites in Deuteronomy 25: 17 -19: “17 Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey out of Egypt, 18 how he attacked you on the way, when you were faint and weary, and struck down all who lagged behind you…19 Therefore …you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” In 1 Samuel 15:3, God’s orders are overtly genocidal: “Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” The logic of irresolvable differences explains war as the unavoidable result of ancient ethnic conflict. 6. BLAME MISTAKES. Civilian deaths are mistakes, accidents, or acts against orders. Explanations of civilian deaths by Israel are blamed on acts of individual soldiers rather than on the orders of military leaders. This tactic denies that mass murder and destruction are Israeli state strategies. War crimes against Gazans are described as acts of individuals, not the result of Israeli policies. For example, the March 23, 2025 murders of fifteen Palestinian medics by IDF soldiers were blamed on "professional failures” and a "breach of orders" by IDF commanders. Israeli military officials often base this excuse for war crimes on the “fog of war.” IDF soldiers have admitted to excessive feelings of power when entering Gaza. Reporting on IDF atrocities capitalizes on such admissions. Although individual IDF soldiers have shown a “chilling disregard” for human life, IDF commanders and the state of Israel deny that war crimes and genocide are state or military policy. Israeli officials say that alleged “war crimes” committed by Israeli soldiers should be investigated as crimes of individuals rather than as the result of state or military policies. 7. APPEASEMENT: Critics are appeasing Hamas killers, rapists, and genocidists. Israel’s leaders and allies have sought to portray the state of Israel as blameless. When Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant were charged by the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor with the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts, the US Congress and President Trump adopted legislation sanctioning officials of the ICC, citing the ICC’s “illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and our close ally Israel.” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted that “Israel has consistently sought peace with the Palestinians,” placing blame on the Palestinian Authority and Hamas for rejecting peace efforts. Other states, including Canada, officially affirmed Israel’s “right to live in peace with its neighbors,” prioritizing a rhetoric of peace over accountability and international law. In contrast, European Council President António Costa and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said these US sanctions were attempts to intimidate ICC officials and undermine the legitimacy of international criminal justice institutions. 8. JUSTIFY ARMING ISRAEL: Arming Israel is legal. It supports Israel’s self-defense. The US and European nations have avoided criticizing Israel out of solidarity with their own Jewish populations. They also want to atone for their profound guilt for not preventing the Holocaust. In the US, Jewish Americans form large voting blocs in key states. They are an influential economic, educational, and political group. The US and EU nations avoid criticizing Israel, a kindred democracy, trading partner, and ally. While some Israeli corporations have been complicit in genocides in other countries, they justify their actions by claiming legality, the private sector’s response to market supply and demand. Many governments have engaged with Israel due to its robust economy. Normal economic trade is justified by respect for Israeli sovereignty. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is one of Israel’s most vocal critics, but that has not stopped nine percent of Israel’s crude oil imported from Brazil. 9. CLAIM GOOD TREATMENT: Palestinians are treated well and receive enough food. By portraying Palestinian civilians, including children, as terrorists, any food offered to the Palestinian people by Israel and its allies is deemed to be “generous.” Shortages of food are blamed on “looting” by Hamas and by criminal gangs. In fact, Israel has not permitted any food to enter Gaza for over seventy days, since the end of the temporary ceasefire. Most families in Gaza currently eat just one meal a day, or less. Children are dying of malnutrition every day. President Trump’s proposal to expel Palestinians from Gaza and annex the contested region has been lauded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who stated: “The actual idea of allowing Gazans who want to leave to leave. I mean, what’s wrong with that?” Not only would such forced displacement be a crime against humanity under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, but resettlement has also been rejected by every Middle Eastern nation President Trump has proposed to relocate Gaza Palestinians. 10. LEGALISM: Israel’s attacks don’t fit the legal definition of genocide, which requires “specific intent to destroy the whole Palestinian people.” The defense that Israeli killing and destruction in Gaza fails to fit the legal definition of genocide is the favorite of lawyers. It has many forms. It is based on denial of Israel’s “intent to destroy” a substantial part of the Palestinian national and ethnic group. Many who have not read the Genocide Convention think genocide can only be proven if the intent is to destroy a whole people. But the Convention clearly states that intent to destroy part of a people is enough to prove genocide. Arguing that this is a civil war against Hamas and that war is mutually exclusive from genocide ignores that fact that most genocides occur during civil or international wars. Claiming that the intent of Israel is self-defense, not genocide, ignores the fact that many genocides, including the Holocaust have been justified by their perpetrators as necessary to defend against subversion, aggression, or invasion. The International Court of Justice in Bosnia v Serbia and Croatia v Serbia, held that if there is any other intent besides destruction of a group, such as “ethnic cleansing” (forced deportation), this other intent precludes conclusive proof of the intent to commit genocide. Israel’s defenders claim that Israel’s intent is self-defense, not genocide. Such misinterpretation of state intent in the Genocide Convention is like saying that if a robber shoots and kills a victim, he cannot be prosecuted for murder because he also had the intent to rob his victim. Claiming that response to aggression justifies all violent reactions, even if they are disproportionate, is a profound distortion of the laws of war. Israel’s rules of engagement permit twenty or more civilian deaths for each combatant death. They are the most extreme in any war since the firebombing and nuclear attacks of World War II. Claiming that Israeli leaders have made no statements advocating destruction of the Palestinian population of Gaza is simply false. There are over 500 recorded instances in a database of statements by Israeli politicians, officers, and other public figures that show incitement and intent to commit genocide in Gaza. A systematic pattern of acts of genocide is also sufficient to prove genocide. The invasion of Rafah has now been added to hundreds of other acts of genocide, such as the destruction of hospitals, maternity centers, refugee camps, feeding centers, blocking of food supplies resulting in starvation, and the murders of relief and medical personnel. 11. BLAME THE VICTIMS: Hamas terrorism justifies defense of Israel’s Jewish people. Israel blames victims and survivors in Gaza for voting Hamas into power. Many Israeli citizens express little or no sympathy for Palestinians, presenting them as a monolithic group of Hamas-supporters instead of a diverse population with many views, including opposition to Hamas. In fact, among Palestinians, opinions vary widely. Polls show that although many Gazans support Hamas for resisting Israeli oppression, only a minority support continued Hamas control of Gaza. Most Palestinian civilians are not Hamas terrorists. Many Palestinians are unaware of the horrors of October 7th. Most have not seen videos of the massacre. Many believe Hamas propaganda that claims evidence of the October 7th assault was manufactured by Israel. 12. PEACE TRUMPS JUSTICE: Making peace outweighs justice for genocide. The claim that peace and reconciliation are more important than justice would obstruct accountability for Hamas, for the Israeli Defense Forces, and for the Israeli government. It would support amnesty for the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by both sides in this war. The UN has called for accountability on all sides, to break the cycles of violence and ensure lasting peace. The American Peace to Prosperity Plan of 2020 would move Israel’s capital to Jerusalem, permit further annexation of the West Bank, legitimize Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and make a two-state solution to the conflict nearly impossible. This American “peace” plan would fail to bring peace. It would also fail to achieve justice. In November 2019, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo overruled his department’s 1978 legal opinion that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are contrary to international law, saying the “establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law”. The following year, Pompeo said the decision on whether to annex the Palestinian territory of the West Bank was an Israeli one. Contrary to Secretary of State Pompeo, Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits Israeli settlements in the West Bank: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” Article 49 also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”. President Trump’s proposal for the U.S. to annex Gaza, move Palestinians out, and build a “Middle East Riviera” would not only violate UNGA Resolution 181, it would commit the crime against humanity of forced deportation under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Trump’s proposal has been rejected by most Palestinians, by every country where Trump proposes to relocate Gazans, and by nearly all experts on international law. This report has analyzed and given examples of the Twelve Tactics of Denial that Israel uses to deny it is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Hamas and Israel have committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. War and genocide will continue until Israel and Hamas conclude a permanent cease-fire enforced by the US, NATO, UN, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Hamas must release all remaining hostages NOW. Israel must end its genocidal blockade of food, fuel, water, and medicines to Gaza NOW. Israel must stop its bombing and genocidal destruction of Gaza NOW. Israel must defeat Hamas and Hamas must be excluded from future governance in Gaza. Israel should then fully withdraw from Gaza with security provided by the US, UN, NATO, and OIC. Hamas perpetrators should be brought to justice in courts with Universal Jurisdiction. Israeli officers who committed war crimes should be tried in Israeli courts. Leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Israel should be tried in the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Israel, the US, EU, and Arab states should fund reconstruction and resettlement of Gaza. Israel should end its segregation and discrimination against Palestinians. Israel must stop expansion of settlements and persecution of West Bank Palestinians. Israel’s Arab neighbors and other Muslim nations must recognize Israel, confirm Israel’s legal right to exist in full security, and never again attack Israel, Israelis, or Jews. The war and genocide in Gaza must stop NOW, before they this war takes another human life. Further Reading: Genocide Watch encourages readers to educate themselves about the processes of genocide. We encourage critical thinking about genocide and the actions of Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, the US, UN, EU, Arab nations, Lebanon, Syria, Russia, and China. We recommend articles about Israel and Gaza at: https://www.genocidewatch.com/ as well as the following articles: https://www.ajc.org/news/israel-is-not-committing-genocide https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/defense-minister-announces-complete-siege-of-gaza-no-power-food-or-fuel/ https://theintercept.com/2024/02/07/gaza-israel-netanyahu-propaganda-lies-palestinians/ https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/12/middleeast/icj-israel-gaza-hamas-genocide-hearing-hague-day-two-intl/index.html https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/23/israel-gaza-war-wwii-palestine https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament/ Dr. Gregory H. Stanton is Founding President of Genocide Watch and the Alliance Against Genocide. He founded the Cambodian Genocide Project. He was Professor in Genocide Studies at George Mason​ ​ University and was James Farmer Professor in Human Rights at the University of Mary Washington. He was President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. He was a law professor at Washington and Lee University. In the State Department, he wrote the UN Resolutions that established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. He wrote the rules of the Khmer Rouge Tribuna​​l. He holds degrees from Oberlin, Harvard Divinity School, Yale Law School, and a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago.

By Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, Founding President, Genocide Watch, Chair, The Alliance Against Genocide This speech was presented on May 15, 2026 by Dr. Gregory Stanton to a Conference on the Human Rights Crisis in Ethiopia in the Kennedy Conference Room, The Russell Office Building, US Senate, Washington, DC The Challenge of Ethiopian Constitutionalism Keynote Speech by Dr. Gregory H. Stanton Conference on the Human Rights Crisis in Ethiopia Kennedy Conference Room, US Senate, May 15, 2026 Dr. Stanton thanks Atticus Mawbe, LLB, London, England, for research and drafting of much of this speech. Ethiopia's history · Ethiopia is the birthplace of humanity. · The oldest ancestor of homo sapiens, dating back 4.2 million years, was found in Ethiopia. · From 100 AD, the Kingdom of Aksum established a unified civilization for 900 years. · After Armenia (301 AD), Ethiopia is one of the world’s oldest Christian kingdoms (324 AD). · Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity became the official state religion. · Amharic became the official language of the Empire. Ethiopia developed its own alphabet. · The Solomonic dynasty from which kings and emperors came was ruled by Amharas. · The Aksum kingdom expanded Ethiopia’s territory until the kingdom collapsed in 960 AD. · Islam came to northern Ethiopia from Arabia during the first Hijra in 615 AD. · Islam became the dominant religion in the current Eritrea and Ethiopia’s current Somali Ogaden region. · The Somali Muslim Sultanate of Adal ruled most of Ethiopia from 1533 to 1866. · Menelik II reestablished the Ethiopian Empire and expanded its territory from 1866 to 1889. · The Ethiopian Empire reabsorbed traditional territories of many non-Amharic groups. · Expansion included ‘southern nationalities’ in Southwest and South Ethiopia provinces. · Amhara governors ruled the territories of Oromo, Wolayta and groups in southern Ethiopia. · Menelik II established fortified katama military settlements throughout the Empire. · Neftenya Amharic warriors were granted feudal tenure over lands they conquered. · Famines were common. The "Great Ethiopian Famine" of 1888-1892 killed a third of Ethiopia's population. Ethiopia’s Ethnic divisions · Ethiopia has been divided between over eighty ethnic groups for over 200 years. · Oromos, Ogaden Somalis, Tigrayans, and other groups suffered from marginalization and dispossession. · The Oromo remained independent until the 1890s, when they were colonized by Ethiopia. · Menelik II’s Ethiopian wars cut the Oromo population from 10 million in 1870 to 5 million in 1900. · The Oromo religion was banned, and Oromo institutions of self-governance were abolished. · Oromo leaders were killed, Oromo land was confiscated, and Oromo cultural institutions were destroyed. · Oromos were subjected to slavery by Amhara masters. · Under Haile Selassie, the Oromo language was banned, and Oromo leaders were arrested and executed. · Oromos, a group more numerous than Amharas, were excluded from political influence in Ethiopia. · Amhara territorial expansion is the basis of today’s anti-Amhara sentiment among Oromos. · Ethiopia’s history of ethnic conflict has prevented Ethiopia from having peace and security. · Every Ethiopian ethnic group has suffered from discrimination, persecution, and genocide. Italian colonialism worsened the divisions, especially between Eritrea and the rest of Ethiopia. · Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1895 but was defeated at the Battle of Adwa on 1 March 1896. · European powers recognized Ethiopia as a sovereign independent nation. · Ethiopia lost its sovereignty in 1936, when Mussolini’s fascist Italy invaded Ethiopia and combined it with Italy’s colony of Eritrea and Somaliland, forming Italian East Africa. · Ethiopia’s sovereignty was restored in 1944 after Italy was defeated in World War II. · On 24 October 1945, Ethiopia became a founding member of the United Nations. Haile Selassie became Ras (regent) in 1916, and Emperor in 1930. · The Ethiopian Empire under Haile Selassie operated according to a strict ethnic hierarchy. · Amharas ruled over Oromos, Tigrayans, Afars, Ogaden Somalis, and other groups. · Emulating Japan, in 1931, Haile Salassie decreed Ethiopia’s first monarchist constitution. · In 1955, the constitution was revised to make Ethiopia a constitutional monarchy. · Although Haile Selassie made gestures toward a more inclusive Ethiopia, with roles for other ethnic groups, the reality was that Amharas were favored above all other ethnicities. · Settlement of Amharas continued in areas that traditionally belonged to other ethnic groups. · The neftenya system was a feudal structure that gave Amharas ownership of seized land. · The system stripped traditional inhabitants of their homes and traditional farming territory. · In 1963, the Ethiopian Imperial Army torched Somali villages and carried out mass killings of livestock. · Watering holes were machine gunned to deny Somalis access to water. Thousands became refugees. · In 1958, famine killed 100,000 Ethiopians. In 1966, famine killed 50,000. In the 1973 famine, up to 200,000 Ethiopians starved to death. · Amhara youth in Addis Ababa protested Haile Salassie’s failure to address the 1973 famine. Mengistu Haile Mariam’s Derg regime overthrew and murdered Haile Selassie in 1974. · The Derg established Ethiopia as a Marxist-Leninist state supported by the Soviet Union. · In 1976-78, over 100,000 Ethiopians were murdered in the Red Terror. · The Derg imposed the 1987 Constitution, a version of the 1977 Soviet constitution. · “Democratic centralism” concentrated dictatorial power in Mengistu and the Workers’ Party. · Under the Derg, arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial executions were state policy. · The Derg abolished all private land ownership, as the USSR did in the 1930s. · Farmers were allocated 25-acre plots, too small to raise anything but subsistence crops. · The Derg forced farmers to sell at below-market prices to feed cities. Food production plummeted. · The Derg imposed travel restrictions to stop peasants from escaping their farms. · Derg policies copied Soviet policies in Ukraine in 1932-33, the Holodomor genocide. · The Derg used scorched earth tactics against the Oromo, burning villages and massacring thousands. · Ethiopia was hit with severe drought from 1980 to 1984. · The 1983–85 famine affected 8 million people.1.2 million Ethiopians died. · The famine left 200,000 orphans, and 2.5 million people internally displaced. · 400,000 refugees fled to other countries from Ethiopia. · Oxfam and Human Rights Watch claim Mengistu’s counterinsurgency and land collectivization policies exacerbated food shortages and the famine. · According to USAID, the hardest hit regions were Tigray, Wollo, and Eritrea. · The Derg rejected food aid to those regions because of the Derg’s counter-insurgency campaigns. Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) rule · The TPLF formed the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF). · The EPRDF overthrew the Derg communist regime in May 1991. · Mengistu fled to Zimbabwe, where he lived the rest of his life in luxury. · Mengistu was tried for genocide in absentia, and in December 2006, was sentenced to death. · The Soviet Union fell in 1989-1991 and stopped its aid to Ethiopia in 1990. · Tigrayans under Meles Zenawi took power and appointed Tigrayans to run the government. · Eritrea was granted independence on May 24, 1993. · The Meles government wrote the 1995 Constitution, based on ethnic states. · Riots broke out over fraud in the 2005 election, won by the EPRDF. Genocides under the Tigrayan TPLF regime · The Tigrayan regime committed genocide against Anuaks, Oromos, Ogadenis, and Amharas. · Ethiopian Defense Forces massacred hundreds of Oromo civilians at Oromo festivals in 2013 and 2016. · Anuaks in Gambella province resisted transfer of their farmlands to Chinese companies. · On December 3, 2003, EPRDF and Highlanders massacred over 416 Anuaks in Gambella city. · Mr. Obang Metho called Dr. Gregory Stanton, President of Genocide Watch who called Michael C. Gonzales, Ethiopia desk officer in the US State Department and informed him of the Gambella massacres. · Gonzales called US Ambassador to Ethiopia Aurelia E. Brazeal, who verified the massacres. · Ambassador Brazeal demanded that Prime Minister Meles stop the genocide. Meles withdrew the EPRDF. · The EPRDF later invaded Sudan to force Anuaks in the Pochalla Refugee Camp to return to Ethiopia. · Dr. Stanton again contacted Michael Gonzales. Gonzales again informed US Ambassador Brazeal. · Ambassador Brazeal demanded that Meles withdraw the EPRDF from Sudan. The EPRDF withdrew. · The EPRDF also committed genocide against Ogadeni Somalis, the Beja, and other groups. · In May 1998 a border dispute ignited the Eritrean-Ethiopian war, which cost 100,000 lives. · After an Ethiopian activist shouted “murderer” at Meles at an event in Washington, DC, Meles collapsed with a heart attack. He died in a Belgian hospital in 2012. The current Abiy Ahmed government came to power in April 2018. · Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is ethnically Oromo. · He has a Christian mother and Muslim father. · Like his mother, he is a Pentecostal Christian. · Abiy Ahmed Abiy released thousands of political prisoners and unbanned opposition parties. · He appointed a gender-balanced cabinet. · He signed peace agreements with Ogadeni Somalis and with Eritrea. · He was awarded the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize "for his efforts to achieve peace and international cooperation, and in particular for his decisive initiative to resolve the border conflict with neighboring Eritrea". · He privatized many state-owned enterprises, including Ethiopian Airlines. · Land in the north is owned by ethnic groups, not individuals, under rist communal ownership. · In the south, most land is farmed by tenant farmers on gult land granted by the Emperor or the state. · In 2019, Abiy Ahmed disbanded the EPRDF and formed his own party, the Prosperity Party, which included three of the four ethnic parties in the EPRDF, but not the Tigrayan TPLF. Genocides under the Abiy Ahmed government · The Abiy government has committed genocides against Tigrayans, Amharas, and Guji. · When Tigrayan leaders sought autonomy in 2020, Abiy sent federal forces into Tigray. · Allied with Amhara Fano and Eritrean armed forces, federal forces bombed civilian population centres, killed unarmed Tigrayan civilians, and committed widespread rapes. · By the war’s conclusion in 2020, up to 600,000 Tigrayans were dead. · Nearly three million Tigrayans were internally displaced. Thousands fled to Sudan. · In 2023, Abiy sent troops to the Amhara Region to dissolve Amhara Fano armed forces. · From 2019 to 2022, a war between Ethiopian federal forces and the Benishangul-Gomuz regional militia killed hundreds of civilians and displaced thousands. · War between the Oromo Liberation Army and federal troops has killed over 5,000 people. · These wars between regional and federal forces show no sign of stopping. Structural flaws in the 1995 Ethiopian Constitution The Tigrayan imposed constitution of 1995 has divided Ethiopia. · The 1995 Constitution is rooted in Marxist “democratic centralist” theory. · Ethnic “self-determination” gives states the rights to secession and to have state militias. · The 1995 constitution is not framed as ruling over all Ethiopians. · It is confederal, rather than federal, allowing ethnic militias and state secession. · Regional governments are given the same overlapping powers as the federal government. · [N]ationalist Ethiopians, … mainly Amhara elites who lost power to Tigrayan and Oromo elites, consider the current government contrary to an Ethiopian national identity. · The 1995 constitution was written by the Tigrayan TPLF. · The Transitional Government was led by TPLF commander Meles Zenawi and his allies. · Although there were a few Amharas in the EPRDF coalition, Tigrayans under Meles dominated it. · Ogadeni Somalis and ethnic groups from south and west Ethiopia were excluded from the drafting process. · The 1995 Constitution was not produced by all Ethiopian ethnicities on an equal footing. Land tenure is still held by the federal and ethnic states. · The 1995 constitution continues to vest land ownership exclusively “in the State and in the peoples of Ethiopia.” · Article 40 states: "Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and shall not be subject to sale or to other means of exchange.” · “Nations,” “Nationalities” and “Peoples” are the Ethiopian terms for ethnic groups and ethnic states. · This communist form of property ownership keeps control in the hands of elites in the central government and the ethnic states. · It does not protect private property rights from State expropriation without compensation. · It does not provide the legal guarantees necessary for private capital investment and production. The 1995 constitution isn't really federal. · Legal rights of ethnic groups, especially in Article 39, formalize ethnic interests. · In contrast to the limited federal powers set forth in the 1995 constitution, Meles’s Transitional Government was authoritarian, undemocratic, and highly centralized. · Under Meles, the TPLF continued to exert total control over the ruling coalition. · When opposition parties made gains in the 2005 elections, the government cracked down on them and won almost all parliamentary seats in the 2010 election. · When ethnic militias began insurgencies, the Abiy government responded with systematic brutality. · Federal forces have used scorched earth tactics in Tigray, Ogaden, and Amhara regions. The 1995 constitution allows ethnic states to have their own militias. · The 1995 Constitution is framed not as a social contract with the population, but with the ethnic groups that make up that population. Fasil Nahum summarises: “The preamble of the Constitution does not open with the familiar “We the People …”. Instead, it says, “We, the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia”. · National sovereignty in international law normally reserves military functions exclusively to nation states. A national government’s monopoly over military forces is a key trait separating sovereign states from constituent members of a single federal state. · Within the European Union, each member state has its own armed forces. · Subordinate states within federal nations do not have their own armies. · In United Kingdom the separate countries (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland) are non-sovereign, and thus the only armed forces are those of the central United Kingdom. · Constitutions that permit constituent states to maintain their own armed forces are confederations of independent states rather than parts of a single sovereign nation. · America’s Articles of Confederation permitted each state to have its own armed forces and gave each state the right to regulate commerce, trade, and tariffs. · America’s founding fathers realized that America needed a new constitution with a powerful federal government to unite the nation and have authority over the states. · In 1787, they wrote a new constitution, in 1788 ratified it, and replaced the Articles of Confederation. · The US Constitution grants the federal government the exclusive rights to regulate interstate commerce, levy tariffs and federal taxes, raise armed forces, conduct foreign affairs, make treaties, appoint ambassadors and federal judges, create federal courts, pass and enforce federal laws, and declare and wage war. · The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. · James Madison, principal author of the US Constitution, said that by ratifying the Constitution states had transferred their sovereignty to the federal government. · Article 10 of the US Constitution reserves non-enumerated powers of the US federal government to the states. But the Supremacy Clause means that when federal law conflicts with state law, federal law prevails. The 1995 Ethiopian constitution grants ethnic states the right to secede from Ethiopia. · Article 39(1): grants the “unconditional right to self-determination, including the right to secession”. · This is a feature practically never seen in national constitutions. · It is unlike the constitutions of true federal nation states such as the United States, Canada, India, or Germany, where ultimate legal sovereignty rests with the sovereign nation state. · The danger of state secession is best illustrated by the American Civil War. · Southern slave-states asserted their right to secede from the Union, a power not granted to states by the US Constitution. · The US federal government mustered a huge army to preserve the Union. · The American Civil War was the result. · The American Civil War cost 600,000 lives. · The regional hatreds the Civil War aroused still divide America today. · If the Southern Confederate States of America had won the Civil War, slavery would not have been abolished until the 1890s and there would be two nations in America. · It took a hundred years after the Civil War to finally give African Americans the right to vote and to prohibit discrimination based on race. · But the Union won the Civil War. · America is much more powerful today because of that Union victory. Apparently the Tigrayan government that wrote the 1995 Constitution hadn't read Madison's Federalist Paper Number 10, which warned about the danger of factions controlling states and why the federal government needed the power to overcome factions. · In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison warned of the danger of domination of states by narrow factions. He said factions were a possible source of conflict in the USA. · Madison recognized that local politics have the most important influence on the practical protection of the rights of minorities. If factions can use local governments to advance their own ends, minority rights could be denied, and the unity of the nation would be threatened. · A strong federal government is necessary to outweigh the influence of factions in states. · This lesson is especially relevant in a multi-ethnic nation like Ethiopia. · The lesson is clear: if Ethiopia is to exist as a single nation, the federal government needs to protect minority rights against the factional interests of majority ethnic groups in its states. · The core functions of a nation need to be substantially reserved to the federal government. · In 1861, ignoring Madison’s warnings, southern States seceded, resulting in the American Civil War. Can Ethiopia function as a true federation? · In Ethiopia, the tragedies of ethnic division and wars of secession continue to this day. · Are the cultural differences between ethnic groups too great in Ethiopia, in terms of ethnic identity, political expectations, practical experience, and national allegiance, for unity? · Should Ethiopia be a confederation like the European Union? The degree of cultural, linguistic and religious variation amongst the ethnicities and regions of Ethiopia is as great as the differences between the many nations that comprise the European Union. · Can the model of the US constitution be an example of federation for Ethiopia? · As Ehrlich notes, “successful federations such as the United States and Canada did not form based on ethnicity. Therefore, states that have natural ethnic divisions cannot expect to adopt North American federalism wholesale”. Why Ethiopia needs a new Constitution · Under the 1995 Constitution, Ethiopia has been plagued by wars and genocides. · After Prime Minister Abiy came to power in 2018, there was a period of comparative inter-ethnic peace. · Ethnic violence has again reared its ugly head, particularly against Tigrayans and Amharas. · A new constitution must create legal structures with the power to prevent civil war and genocide. The Ethiopian government has appointed a commission to write a new constitution. · The current Ethiopian government under Prime Minister Abiy recognises some of the problems with the 1995 Constitution, and it has created a Dialogue Commission to write a new constitution. · To date, little discussion has recognized the urgency of a new Ethiopian constitution. · Public consultations have included almost no Tigrayan or Somali participants. · The progress of the Dialogue on a new Ethiopian constitution has been very slow. What is required for a new Ethiopian constitution? First, it must not be adopted by a government that is mistrusted by any major ethnic groups. · It must not be drafted nor be seen to be advantageous for any single ethnic group. · If a constitution is adopted by a government perceived as partial to one ethnic group at the expense of others, the resulting constitution will have no legitimacy with other groups. · Second, the new constitution must not take Ethiopian unity for granted. · It must not create pathways for separatism or ethnic militias. · It must create a federal government that is strong enough to overcome the centrifugal forces created by ethnic factions in states. · Madison knew that for the United States, where a history of regional and racial disunity was strong, a unified federal government was necessary. · Ethiopia has even more ethnic and racial disunity than America had in 1789. · The secession of Eritrea and the threatened secession of Tigray provide warnings of the danger to national unity of ethnically based states with the right of secession. · Third, the new constitution must clearly define the powers of the federal government and the residual powers of state governments. · It must distinguish between citizenship in the Ethiopian nation and Ethiopia’s states. · Deciding the distribution of powers will be difficult, but if Ethiopia is to avoid civil wars, Ethiopians must agree on the respective roles of the federal and state governments, then write them into the new constitution and strictly abide by them. What recommendations does Genocide Watch have for a new Ethiopian constitution? · Legitimate authority of governments flows up from the people, not down from kings. · Ethno-federalism is not federal at all. · Federal authority from the political center must be supreme over political parties, ethnic groups, regions, and states. · Even in theory, the concept of ethno-federalism as set out in the 1995 Ethiopian Constitution, especially in Art. 39, is a recipe for conflict and war. · The greatest failure of the 1995 Constitution is not the legal-political structure it creates, nor any rights or powers that it reserves to the ethnic states. · Rather, the greatest failure of the 1995 Constitution is the perception that it was written by Tigrayans only for the benefit of the Tigrayan people and region. · The perception that the Constitution was crafted by Tigrayans for their own purposes means many Amharas and Oromos do not trust it. · This distrust means that the 1995 Constitution can never serve as the basis of an Ethiopia-wide constitutional system that most Ethiopians will believe in. · Many Ethiopians do not believe that Ethiopia has a political system they can trust. · Trust is the fundamental foundation for the consent of the governed. · Mistrust of the federal government in Ethiopia has caused both instability and tragedy. · Instability because many Ethiopians believe a Tigrayan-authored constitution was not designed to meet the needs of other ethnic groups. · Tragedy because this mistrust has been a justification for acts of genocide against Tigrayans, culminating in the genocide in Tigray that took as many as 400,000 lives. · A constitution must be seen to represent all the ethnic groups that have woven the rich, many colored cultural tapestry of Ethiopia. · It is not enough that these ethnic groups are consulted. It must be seen and widely accepted that they have all had their say. Only this will produce an Ethiopia in which no ethnic group considers that the nation’s political structure is designed to benefit one group over others. · The constitution must be trusted by Amharas, Tigrayans, Oromos and Somalis, and all the other 80+ ethnic groups of Ethiopia. Conclusion · The constitution of 1995 will continue to produce civil wars and ethnic genocides. · The 1995 constitution sets out sweeping rights for ethnic states while providing no clear division of powers between the federal and state governments. · It can only lead to more power struggles like those we have seen since 1995. · If one ethnic group imposes its interests on the country, the next constitution will fail, just as the 1995 Constitution has. · In a few decades, Ethiopians will find themselves back where they are today, asking what went wrong. · Ethiopia must decide whether it will be a nation with a central autocracy or a true federation. · Those who want a strong Ethiopian federal nation in which Ethiopians are citizens of Ethiopia first and members of their ethnic group second must revise the 1995 constitution. In the words of the great Ethiopian philosopher Walda Heywat: “Do not believe the doctrine of fools who say that our ‘fellow man’ means only our relatives or our friends. Do not say what they do, for all men are our fellow men, whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish or pagan. All are equal to us and our brothers, because we are all the sons of one father and the creatures of one creator.”

A truck carrying Somali security forces drives in Mogadishu before planned antigovernment protest. [Feisal Omar / Reuters] Residents flee from their homes due to fighting between two warring political factions. Violence has erupted in Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, as government forces and opposition-allied militias have exchanged fire before an antigovernment protest, damaging buildings and forcing residents to flee. Fighting began on Wednesday and continued into Thursday before planned protests against President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s decision to extend his term despite it expiring last month. The move has also pushed back elections, sparking outrage among the opposition, who see it as Mohamud’s plan to centralise power. The government has rejected these allegations. The opposition has called for a peaceful demonstration on Thursday. The Associated Press news agency reported that there was a large number of people in the streets and a heavy security presence with police patrolling. Police said the violence came from “organised attacks” and linked it to political groups trying to secure power. It is yet another political upheaval for Somalia, which has been fighting the armed group al-Shabab since 2007. Somalia last held an election in 1969 and then was riven by civil war for more than 30 years. Gunshots and explosions were heard in several neighbourhoods in Mogadishu with resident Abdullahi Mohamed telling AP: “We heard heavy weapons fire, and people were fleeing their homes.” Former Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khaire, who said he has been targeted by security forces, lambasted the government in a post on X, saying it is using “heavy weaponry” made for “conventional battlefield operations”. “These are weapons entrusted to the Somali state to fight Al-Shabaab, now turned against Somalia’s own leaders and citizens in an unprecedented campaign of political repression and targeted killing,” he said. He added that “civilian infrastructure has not been spared” and electrical supplies have been “deliberately disrupted”. ‘Mortars and weapons’ Civilians are at risk of becoming collateral in the fallout between the two warring political factions. Ahmed Ismail, a Mogadishu resident told the Reuters news agency: “A mortar shell landed on my neighbour’s house, injuring a mother. A big house near us is also ablaze. Mortars and other weapons landed on it.” Mohamud Farah, another witness, told Reuters that two armoured vehicles were set ablaze. There have been no official reports of casualties. Fighting subsided by 9:30am (06:30 GMT) on Thursday, according to the AFP news agency, as the government and the opposition began talks. A security analyst who asked to remain anonymous told AFP that there are “civilian casualties in some areas”. The African Union called for restraint, saying it was deeply concerned by clashes in residential areas. The European Union echoed this sentiment along with the US embassy in Mogadishu. Mohamud is not the first Somali president to try to outstay his term. Former President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo stayed more than a year in office after the official end of his mandate in 2021, triggering violence and condemnation from the international community. © 2026 Al Jazeera Media Network

June 4th 2026 Russia launched a major bombardment of cities across Ukraine early on June 2, leaving over one hundred civilians dead or wounded. The attack, which focused primarily on Kyiv and Dnipro, was the most recent in a series of deadly overnight bombing raids beginning in early May that have signaled a new phase in Kremlin efforts to target Ukraine’s civilian population amid mounting indications that Russia’s invasion is stalling on the battlefield. The latest Russian aerial attack lasted throughout the night and featured 656 drones along with 73 missiles, according to Ukrainian Air Force officials. Significantly, this included more than thirty ballistic missiles, making it one of the largest ballistic bombardments of the entire war. While Ukraine has developed effective air defense strategies to counter Russian drones and cruise missiles, Kyiv remains heavily dependent on US-made Patriot air defense systems to defend against ballistic missiles. However, Ukraine is known to be currently running short of the expensive interceptor missiles used by the Patriot system. Russian dictator Vladimir Putin apparently intends to exploit this vulnerability. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has acknowledged the threat posed by his country’s depleted air defenses and recently sent a written appeal to US President Donald Trump calling on him to facilitate the delivery of desperately needed Patriot interceptors. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth responded to this letter by stating that the United States would “find a way” to help. The Ukrainian leader is also attempting to form a coalition of countries to create a European anti-ballistic air defense system. However, this is a long-term initiative that could take years to produce results. In the meantime, Ukraine is expected to remain reliant on the United States for the Patriot interceptors that are the only effective defense against Russia’s ballistic missile barrages. The recent upsurge in Russian strikes on Ukrainian civilian targets has come at a time when Putin’s invasion appears to be in danger of unraveling. The Russian military has struggled to advance during the first five months of 2026, and may actually have lost ground in May. This loss of momentum is largely down to the increasing effectiveness of Ukraine’s drone-based defenses, which now dominate an area stretching more than ten kilometers beyond the nominal front lines of the war, creating a kill zone that is making large-scale offensive operations extremely challenging. Despite failing to achieve any battlefield breakthroughs, the invading Russian army continues to suffer catastrophic losses in Ukraine. Since late 2025, Ukrainian officials claim to have inflicted more than thirty thousand Russian casualties each month. Overall, almost half a million Russian soldiers have now been killed during the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, British spy chief Anne Keast-Butler reported in late May. Russia is also suffering military setbacks beyond the battlefield. In recent months, Ukraine has launched a highly effective campaign of mid-range drone strikes targeting Russian logistics behind the front lines. This has severely disrupted the resupply of front line troops while also threatening to cut the so-called “land bridge” connecting Russia with the occupied Crimean peninsula. In parallel, Ukraine has expanded long-range bombing raids on military and industrial targets across Russia. Since the start of 2026, Ukrainian forces have carried out a series of strikes on military plants and energy infrastructure facilities located over one thousand kilometers from the Ukrainian border. In May, Russia was forced to dramatically scale back this year’s Victory Day parade in Moscow, a decision that confirmed the Kremlin’s inability to prevent Ukraine’s escalating air offensive. These mounting setbacks have undermined the Putin regime’s attempts to portray Russian victory in Ukraine as inevitable. Instead, the mood inside Russia now seems to be changing for the worse, with more and more people questioning the wisdom of the invasion and doubting whether Putin can still realistically achieve his maximalist goals in Ukraine. This does not mean that the war is close to a conclusion, however. Putin remains firmly in control of Russia and has succeeded in creating a regime that is highly resistant to both palace coups and potential grassroots uprisings. With no plausible domestic threats on the horizon, he is likely to press ahead with his faltering invasion, despite what appear to be Russia’s rapidly diminishing chances of success. From Putin’s perspective, the alternative to fighting on is even less appealing than the current uncertain outlook. Accepting a compromise peace based on today’s front lines would mean acknowledging the geopolitical reality of an independent, democratic, militarily powerful, and permanently hostile Ukrainian state on Russia’s doorstep. This would be viewed in Moscow as a defeat of historic proportions. Putin is well aware that he would probably not survive such an outcome. Rather than seeking a negotiated end to the war, Putin will now almost certainly look to double down on his terror campaign against Ukraine’s civilian population. The Ukrainians themselves understand this and show no signs of breaking. The real question is how the international community will respond. Will they act as bystanders amid Russia’s escalating war crimes, or will they take steps to help Ukraine defend itself and impose additional costs on the Kremlin? Peter Dickinson is editor of the Atlantic Council’s UkraineAlert service. © 2026 Atlantic Council

Women say they were raped and ransomed by RSF fighters in Sudan’s ongoing war Associated Press June 2, 2026 Sudanese women survivors of RSF mass rapes. Source: Manara Magazine By SAM MEDNICK KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — Naked, hungry, raped and lying in her own urine, the woman said her captors after two days of misery handed her a phone. Call your friends and family, they said. Tell them to buy your freedom or you’ll be killed. The 38-year-old said she screamed on the calls as horrified loved ones listened to her being tortured in a remote village in western Sudan. Now safely in the capital, Khartoum, she looked through photos she took of her battered face and body after being freed in September. She wants them to serve as evidence to hold the attackers accountable. “I thought about seeking justice one day,” she told The Associated Press. The AP does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted. The United Nations calls sexual violence one of the “most defining features” of Sudan’s war, now in its fourth year. It says sexual assaults have soared since the war began but it did not have data on assaults by combatants. The U.N. says many women have been subject to sexual slavery and forced to pay ransoms for their release, sometimes up to $10,000. The AP met three women who said they were abducted, held as sex slaves and forced to buy their freedom. They were introduced by aid workers who said they were aware of what had happened. The AP could not verify the accounts by the women who spoke out in a country where discussing sexual assault remains deeply taboo. All three blamed the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces that are battling Sudan’s military. The U.N. and rights groups have accused all parties of sexual assault, including allied armed groups, but they say the majority of the violence has been committed by the RSF, particularly in the Khartoum area, Darfur and Gezira state. The U.N. says South Kordofan has also become a hot spot as the war expands there. The RSF did not respond to questions about abductions or assaults. (AP Illustration/Peter Hamlin) Captors demanded $1,500 for her freedom The 38-year-old woman said she fled her home in el-Fasher in September, weeks before the besieged city in Darfur was captured by the RSF, an assault the UN said bore “hallmarks of genocide. ” Her husband, a soldier, had been killed. Her brother had been shot and badly wounded and needed care. RSF fighters ambushed them on the road, she said. They separated out the women and children and searched the men for shoulder marks indicating they had carried a gun, a sign they likely were soldiers. Everyone was forced to strip, she said. When the RSF tried to kill her brother, she told them to take her instead. She said she was bound, beaten and thrown into a truck with four other women and teenage girls and driven to an abandoned village in the desert. Naked and hungry, they lay bound in a shelter, urinating on themselves. For the next two days, she said she and the others were raped multiple times by different men. The captors would enter and choose who they wanted, untie them, assault them and bind them again. “I was thinking about ending my life,” the woman said, wiping away tears. On the second day, the men demanded about $1,500 for her freedom. She said they gave her a phone and told her to empty her bank account. She transferred everything, about $200. (AP Illustration/Peter Hamlin) They made her open Facebook and reach out to contacts. She called her cousin. But once he paid, she said, the fighters called him back and pressed a metal object on her fingernails while she screamed in pain, so he’d send more. She said the torture, including sexual assault, went on for hours during calls. Her captors finally accepted about $700 for her release. She still wonders about the women unable to pay. They remain captive and eventually disappear, said Hala Alkarib, regional director of the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa, a grassroots feminist network. Ransom cases have risen for sexual assault and other cases The RSF has long held men and women for ransom but it has become more prevalent during the war, Sudan experts say. Incidents of ransom, including for a small number involving sexual assault, have jumped by nearly 195% from the beginning of the war until May, according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, a U.S.-based nonprofit. It said the majority of perpetrators are RSF fighters. Ransoms will increase as the paramilitary force fragments following high-level defections, said Mohamed Younis, a Sudanese conflict analyst. Another of the three women said that even when ransom money was collected, she wasn’t freed. After a relative in the United States transferred about $1,250, the 30-year-old said, the captors still didn’t want to release her. In what she described as compassion, one smuggled her out of the compound at night and left her to find her way home. She said she had been abducted from a market in Khartoum in 2024 when the RSF controlled the city. She was kept in a hut with other women for two weeks and forced to cook and clean, tend to cattle and sometimes bathe the fighters. Each night she and the others were raped, she said: “They never missed a day ... I have nightmares.” The third woman said she had been abducted outside Dilling in South Kordofan, held for nine days in a compound, raped once and beaten. Her family paid for her release in September. One survivor now mentors others (AP Illustration/Peter Hamlin) Psychologists say the ransoms have financial and emotional impacts on families, plunging them into debt as they sell their gold, cars and houses. “The situation of these families is fragile,” said Thuria Komi, director of Bait Al Mohaba, a local group supporting women, including those who were sexually assaulted. She said her organization lacks the money to provide help the women need, including assistance with medical treatment. The Trump administration last year stopped funding for the United Nations Population Fund, which provides support for sexual and gender-based violence, cutting more than $370 million in grants for more than 25 countries including Sudan, the U.N. agency said. The administration cited claims about past coercive abortions in China that UNFPA called unfounded. Sudan is still receiving over $220 million this year from the U.S. for other humanitarian needs, according to U.N. data. Reunited with her brother and living in a camp for displaced people, the 38-year-old said she struggles to move on. Doctors told her she had internal bleeding and fluid buildup from her ordeal, but she can’t afford surgery. She has found solace in mentoring women and girls in the camp, but the debts she owes to those who saved her weigh heavily. Some were later killed in the war. “Even those who died, I want to return it to their children or give it as charity on their behalf,” she said. “So I can feel at peace.” ___ For more on Africa and development: https://apnews.com/hub/africa-pulse The Associated Press receives financial support for global health and development coverage in Africa from the Gates Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org. SAM MEDNICK Mednick is an AP correspondent for Israel and the Palestinian Territories. She focuses on conflict, humanitarian crises and human rights abuses. Mednick formerly covered West & Central Africa and South Sudan. Copyright 2026 Associated Press

President Donald Trump…credit: Fulton County Sheriff’s Department Mass deportations violate U.S. and international law. They’re also crimes against humanity. By Dr. Gregory H Stanton Founding President Genocide Watch   President Trump’s order to arrest and deport millions of undocumented immigrants, including hundreds of thousands of refugees, violates US obligations under the 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees. The US Senate ratified that treaty unanimously in 1968. 147 nations are States Parties to the treaty. The US adopted the Refugee Protocol into US law in the United States Refugee Act of 1980, passed unanimously by the Senate and signed by President Jimmy Carter, who noted, “The Refugee Act reflects our long tradition as a haven for people uprooted by persecution and political turmoil.” The Refugee Protocol applies the operative Articles of the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees: Article 1 defines “refugee” as any person who is outside the country of his or her nationality owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and who is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to his or her country. Refugees seeking asylum who cross borders illegally are not to be considered criminals. Article 31 says states shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees coming from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened. They must present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. Article 33, the heart of the Refugee Convention, says: “No Contracting State shall expel or return (“ refouler ”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” Convicted criminals are not eligible to be protected as refugees. Article 1 F denies refugee status to anyone against whom there is evidence of a war crime, crime against humanity, or a serious non-political crime.  However, Article 32 holds that States Parties shall not expel a refugee in their territory except in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with due process of law. Massive ICE roundups and forced deportations without trials fall far short of that standard. Couldn’t the US invoke Article 9 of the Refugee Convention and claim that smuggling of fentanyl by undocumented migrants is a grave and exceptional circumstance that threatens US national security and requires their expulsion? The fatal flaw in this rationale is that the people being deported are already in the US and pose no more threat to national security than ordinary American citizens. Two-thirds of undocumented immigrants in the US have lived in the US for ten years or more . Countries expected to resettle deportees may invoke Article 4 of the Refugee Protocol and dispute any “national security” claim in the International Court of Justice. Such countries are not legally obligated to accept the return of their citizens who have fled to the USA. Couldn’t President Trump simply withdraw from the Refugee Protocol?  Not so fast. To withdraw from (denounce) the Protocol, the US must give one year’s notice to the UN Secretary-General. US denunciation would not take effect until one year after the Secretary-General receives notification. Trump’s deportations are crimes against humanity. At Nuremberg, Nazi leaders were tried for crimes against humanity that included forced deportations of Jews. Today forced deportations are outlawed by many decisions of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. In 2002, the International Criminal Court became a permanent world tribunal to try such crimes. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Article (7(1)(d)) makes deportation or forcible transfer of a population a crime against humanity. The Rome Statute defines deportation as “forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area where they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law.” The US is not a State Party to the Rome Statute. US citizens cannot be tried by the ICC unless they committed a crime against a citizen or on the territory of a country that is a State Party to the ICC. 125 nations are States Parties to the ICC Statute, including 25 in Latin America and 33 in Africa. If the US deports a citizen of El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala, Afghanistan, Brazil, Bosnia, DR Congo, Nigeria, Ukraine or 114 other ICC States Parties, those countries could ask the ICC Prosecutor to bring charges against a US official who participated in the deportation of their citizens. There is no head of state immunity in the ICC for crimes against humanity committed by heads of state or government officials. Though it is politically unlikely, even President Trump himself could be charged for these mass deportations and put on trial. Refugees who have sought asylum are lawfully present in the US under both US and international law. They are not criminals for entering without visas. So, too, are persons granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) by Presidential Order. Venezuelans, Haitians, Cubans, Salvadorans, and others fleeing Marxist dictatorships or countries controlled by criminal gangs were granted protected status by President Biden. President Trump has now rescinded TPS for Venezuelans and wants to deport 600,000 Venezuelans back into the tyranny run by the Marxist dictator Maduro of Venezuela. President Trump’s revocation of their Temporary Protected Status was arbitrary and capricious. It should be struck down by the US Supreme Court because it violates both the US Refugee Act and international law. Universal Jurisdiction Crimes against humanity, like genocide, torture, and war crimes are crimes of universal jurisdiction. Like piracy, they can be prosecuted no matter where the crime was committed and regardless of the defendant’s nationality. Such crimes constitute peremptory norms ( jus cogens ) and violate duties owed to all of humanity ( erga omnes .) Fifteen countries enforce universal jurisdiction in their courts: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The US has universal jurisdiction for torture and genocide. Any US official who orders or carries out mass deportations is committing a crime against humanity. The U.S. Congress should subpoena their names and their full records of participation in ICE raids. State laws should prohibit the wearing of masks by all law enforcement personnel and should require that all such persons wear and use body cameras at all times subject to downloads by city and state law enforcement authorities. State laws should make it a felony to violate these laws and to resist arrest for violations. In the future, they may travel to Europe for business or vacations. If they travel to a country with universal jurisdiction, their identities are verified, and evidence is prepared against them, they could be arrested and charged as soon as they step off their flights in Paris or Berlin. They could be put on trial there for crimes against humanity. It would not be an auspicious way to begin a vacation.   Dr. Gregory H. Stanton is Founding President of Genocide Watch and the Alliance Against Genocide. He founded the Cambodian Genocide Project. He was Professor in Genocide Studies at George Mason​ ​ University and was James Farmer Professor in Human Rights at the University of Mary Washington. He was a law professor at Washington and Lee University. In the State Department, he wrote the UN Resolutions that established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. He wrote the rules of the Khmer Rouge Tribuna​​l. He holds degrees from Oberlin, Harvard Divinity School, Yale Law School, and a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology from the University of Chicago. Published under Creative Commons Copyright 2025 Genocide Watch, Inc. May be freely republished with credit to author and without edits.

Mourning the death of a family member after the attack in Jos on Palm Sunday, March 29, 2026 Credit: Samson Omale/Associated Press Memorandum on Nigeria to the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion To: Ms. Nazila Ghanea, U.N. Special Rapporteur From: Genocide Watch, The Alliance Against Genocide Re: Input for the Special Rapporteur’s country visit to Nigeria Date: April 30, 2026 Jihadist massacres of Christians and moderate Muslims in Nigeria constitute Genocide. Muslim jihadist attacks on churches, religiously sponsored schools, and Christian villages in Nigeria directly threaten freedom of religion or belief. Two jihadist groups, Boko Haram and the Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP) have murdered over 30,000 Christians and moderate Muslims since 2009. Fulani jihadist militias have murdered another 30,000 Christian civilians, burned their villages, and declared the villages to be part of a “Caliphate.” There is strong evidence that Fulani, Hausa, and other Muslim Generals in the Nigerian Army are intentionally preventing their troops from intervening to stop massacres of Christian villages until the killing is finished. Jihadist groups are buying their guns, armed pick-up trucks, fuel, and supplies with money from Fulani cattle owners, who want to increase the grazing areas for their large cattle herds. Many herds are owned by Generals in the Nigerian Army. Nigerian President Buhari, a Fulani himself, was President of the Fulani Cattlemen’s Association. Four terrorist groups are perpetrating the massacres: Fulani jihadist militias, the Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP), Boko Haram, and Lakurawa. They escalated their massacres in 2025 and 2026. Since 2001, these Muslim terrorist groups have murdered over 60,000 people. Nigeria is ranked fourth globally for the impact of terrorism according to the 2026 Global Terrorism Index. Kidnapping for ransom has become a way these terrorist groups finance their operations. In 2024, at least 580 civilians, including women and girls, were abducted and held for ransom. The Nigerian government calls the perpetrators “bandits.” This is a tactic the government uses to avoid identifying the ethnic and religious affiliation of Fulani and Boko Haram kidnappers. Several hostage camps are within twenty kilometers of Nigerian military bases. Yet the Nigerian military never raids the camps to free the victims. Fulani jihadist militias have concentrated their attacks in the Middle Belt states of Benue, Plateau, Kaduna, and Kogi. According to the speaker of Nigeria’s house of representatives, jihadist attacks have caused the deaths of more than 60,000 people and displaced more than 2.2 million people. As of mid-2025, over 500,000 people had been displaced into IDP camps in Benue state alone. The camps lack adequate access to food, water, and healthcare. In June 2025, Fulani militants attacked the predominantly Catholic village of Yelwata. They destroyed homes and burned people alive, killing 100 to over 200 villagers. The militants even murdered infants, toddlers, and the elderly. In July 2025, Fulani militants attacked Bindi, a Christian farming village in Plateau State. The assailants killed at least 27 civilians, including women and children. Soldiers stationed nearby from Operation Safe Haven failed to respond to urgent calls for help. Fulani jihadist militants attacked residents of Kwakwahu, Madagali County, Adamawa State in October 2025. Despite desperate pleas for help to nearby security forces, the assault lasted for hours without any intervention from security forces. Survivors paid a large ransom for release of remaining hostages. Victims of armed attacks are typically unarmed farmers and villagers targeted by heavily armed attackers. Survivors have no access to protection or justice. Amnesty International reports that 10,217 people have been killed by terrorists in the past two years. The persecution of Christians in Nigeria has been condemned by U.S. President Donald Trump. Nigerian President Bola Tinubu denies the charges. Genocide Watch interviews with two Nigerian reporters on jihadist attacks In interviews with two reporters for TruthNigeria—Masara Kim and Mike Odeh James—the West Africa Team at Genocide Watch learned of genocidal attacks on Christian villages as well as the inaction and complicity of the Nigerian Army. Masara Kim and Mike James spoke to numerous eyewitnesses of the targeted attacks in Nigeria. The UN Special Rapporteur should take note of what the eyewitnesses told them. Christian villages often face attacks by over 100 Fulani militiamen armed with assault weapons. They arrive in pickup trucks with 50 caliber machine guns and on motorcycles. Usually, the only weapons the villagers have are ancient shotguns, machetes, and slingshots. Even these arms are often confiscated by the Nigerian Army for alleged violation of weapons laws. Mr. Kim spoke to us of a pastor whose gun was confiscated by the Army. A short time later, the pastor and his family were murdered in an attack on their village. Some villages have formed civilian self-defense groups. However, members of such forces are often arrested by the same Nigerian security forces that failed to protect them. Christian villagers are neither protected nor permitted to protect themselves. This genocide by attrition is not sporadic. It is systematic and expanding. Since 2001, jihadists have invaded and taken over more than 1,000 Christian villages: over 200 in Plateau State, 300 in Kaduna State, over 200 in Benue State, more than 300 in Nasarawa State, and more than 500 in Niger State. Fulani jihadists have killed and expelled villagers and established Muslim theocratic governments and taxation systems. Captured villages are then used as staging grounds for attacks on neighboring villages. Fulani jihadists target crops as well. They come at night armed with machetes, and level acres of crops in a single night. This is a deliberate measure to starve the villages the jihadists then invade and take over. Destruction of their crops leave villagers with no food and no money to buy food. Some villagers have resorted to artisanal mining. Men, women, and children climb into wells and dig through the sand at the bottom looking for minerals to sell. The wells often collapse, burying whoever may be inside. Journalists like Masara Kim and Mike James face great danger because of their reporting. In 2020, Mr. Kim was interrogated by the Nigerian Secret Service for hours following his publishing a report that exposed plans by Fulani jihadists to attack Christian villages in the coming days. His report allowed the villages to prepare for the jihadist attacks, and they were able to minimize casualties. According to Mr. Kim, the Nigerian Secret Service were upset with him for exposing the vulnerability of those villages and charging the Nigerian government and military with failure to protect the population. Other Nigerian publications reported on similar detentions by the Secret Service. Mr. Kim has received death threats from Nigerian government officials with warnings to stay away from the scenes of village massacres. Mr. Kim has been the target of jihadist machine guns on several occasions. He has been in car chases in which he narrowly escaped with his life. He relocated from his home village to a poorer village for his own safety and the safety of his family. He often can’t return to his family at night. He has made this sacrifice to report on the massacres of his people. The Nigerian Government’s Twelve Tactics of Denial Twelve tactics are used by the Nigerian government to diminish and deny the existence of the genocide of Christians in Nigeria. 1. Use euphemisms. Baldly deny the charges of genocide outright. Nigerian governors and President Tinubu explain away the attacks as “herder-farmer conflicts,” as though they are two-sided battles. Such euphemisms are used to deny the systematic, organized, one-sided nature of the attacks. 2. Blame Climate Change. The most pervasive and dangerous denial tactic, according to Masara Kim, is using Climate Change to obfuscate the genocidal intent of the Fulani jihadists. By treating their attacks as unintentional results of natural forces, this tactic denies the genocidal intent of the jihadist attackers. The US State Department has been rendered inert by this tactic. If the attacks result from natural forces, nothing can be done about them. International action to stop the conflict would be ineffective. Nigeria, like many countries in Africa, is certainly experiencing the effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and negative effects on farming. This is driving human migration in Nigeria south, in the same direction that Fulani jihadists are taking over farmland for cattle grazing. This denial tactic is effective because deniers can point to climate change as the cause of human movement in Nigeria and by extension as the underlying reason for the massacres. The truth is that climate change and the Nigerian genocide are interconnected. But that fact does not mean that the Nigerian government is powerless to prevent and stop the killing. Does climate change make the jihadists burn down churches if they only want to take over grazing land? In no other country are groups of herders murdering entire villages en masse. Why would climate change have that effect in Nigeria alone? Real environmental issues are being used as a mask to cover up a genocide of Christians in Nigeria. 3. Question and minimize the statistics. Nigeria’s Foreign Minister says that no more Christians than Muslims have been killed by terrorists. That is a lie. Over 60,000 Christians have been murdered by Boko Haram and Fulani Jihadists since 2009. The highest estimate of moderate Muslims killed by Boko Haram is 20,000. Both Boko Haram and Fulani jihadists target Christian villages and schools, but the Fulani jihadists leave Muslim villages and schools untouched. 4. Attack the motivations of the truth-tellers. Dismiss U.S. charges as products of election-year politics in America, or of anti-Islamic Christians. American imperialists have demonstrated their hatred of Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine. This “moral disqualification” argument is a red herring used by the Nigerian Ambassadors at both the U.N. Human Rights Council and the U.N. Security Council. It is aimed to appeal to fellow Islamic countries. 5. Emphasize the strangeness of the victims. Classify Nigerian Christians as infidels, tribalists, or as corrupted by colonialism. Islam is the true religion. Christians are infidels. They are unlike the Muslim generals who control northern Nigeria and who own vast cattle herds. Americans or Europeans use racist de-humanization of Black Africans as naturally uncivilized and violent, “They’re Africans. They just do these sorts of things to each other.” 6. Rationalize the deaths as the result of Nigerian history. Conflict between Fulanis and other ethnic groups in Nigeria dates back over two centuries, to the Sokoto caliphate of Osman dan Fodio in the early nineteenth century. That Fulani jihad forcibly converted the Hausa and other northern Nigerians to Islam. It was only stopped by British colonialism and Christian missionaries. Boko Haram and Fulani expansion are just reactions to the continuing influence of colonialism. The targeting of Christians is a natural response to imperialism. Forced displacement of Christian villages is the inevitable reaction to the history of Christian domination of Muslims in northern Nigeria. The Nigerian Ambassador to the U.N. claimed that the deaths were just the result of age-old tribal conflicts between cattle herders (Fulani) and farmers (Christian African). In fact, there were no genocidal massacres in northern Nigeria until the Nigerian government came under the control of Muslim presidents and a Muslim led army. 7. Blame “out of control” forces for committing the killings, Claim that the killings are by “bandits” or undefined “terrorists”. Claim that their motivation is to profit from ransoms paid by families of kidnapped victims. Deny that there is any religious aspect to the genocide of Christians. This shifting of blame denies responsibility for the complicity of the Nigerian government. The success of this tactic is demonstrated by the absence of any U.N. Security Council Resolutions condemning this genocide. The Nigerian government, UN, and academic “experts” blame the killings on bandits and terrorists and demand that the Nigerian government disarm the terrorists and bring their leaders to justice. In fact, Fulani jihadists obtain their weapons from corrupt Nigerian generals. Not one major Fulani or Boko Haram leader has been arrested or tried. 8. Avoid antagonizing the killers, who might walk out of “the peace process.” This real politik argument is used to frighten diplomats who fear “upsetting the peace process” in Nigeria. In 2026 the argument has become: “don’t upset the fragile new order under President Tinubu, with whom the US wants to get along. Meanwhile the displacement of Christians from Central and Northern Nigeria proceeds. Genocidal massacres, kidnapping from schools, and rapes continue weekly. This pacifist argument, which diplomats repeatedly and naively espouse, ignores the fact that genocidists are serial killers. Policies toward them based on fear lead only to appeasement and further genocide. 9. Justify denial in favor of current economic interests. This is the key reason why oil companies oppose an arms embargo on the Nigerian government. Nigeria is a source of oil for American and European companies. (Shell Oil, Chevron/Texaco, British Petroleum, Exxon/Mobil, Agip and Total) are the primary developers of southeastern Nigeria’s oilfields. The U.S. and UK sell millions of dollars of arms to Nigeria. The U.K. has threatened to veto U.N. sanctions. 10. Claim that what is going on doesn’t fit the definition of genocide. “Definitionalist” denial is most common among lawyers and policy makers who want to avoid intervention beyond provision of humanitarian aid. It results in “analysis paralysis.” The European Union, the Secretary General of the United Nations and even Amnesty International still avoid calling the crimes in Nigeria by their proper name: Genocide. It is a pity. There are three reasons for such reluctance: A. Among journalists, the public, diplomats, and lawyers who haven’t read the Genocide Convention, there is a common misconception that a finding of genocide would legally require action to suppress it. Unfortunately, the Genocide Convention carries no such legal compulsion to act. It legally requires only that states-parties pass national laws against genocide and then prosecute or extradite those who commit the crime. Article VIII of the Convention says they also “may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide.” But they aren’t legally required to do so. B. Another misconception is the “all or none” concept of genocide. The all-or-none school considers killings to be genocide only if their intent is to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group “in whole.” Their model is the Holocaust. They ignore the “in part” in the definition in the Genocide Convention, which they often haven’t read. C. Since the 1990’s, a new obstacle to calling genocide by its proper name has been the distinction between genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” a term originally invented as a euphemism for genocide in the Balkans. Genocide and “ethnic cleansing” are sometimes portrayed as mutually exclusive crimes, but they are not. The fallacy of the distinction is evident in Nigeria, where the intent of the Fulani Jihadist militias is to drive Christian farmers off of their ancestral lands (ethnic cleansing,) using terror caused by systematic acts of genocide, including mass murder, mass rape, and mass starvation. Nigerian government run IDP camps are like concentration camps run by Nigerian army guards, where murder and rape are rampant. Both ethnic cleansing and genocide are underway in Nigeria. D. Claim that the “intent” of the perpetrator is merely “ethnic cleansing” not “genocide,” which requires the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Such arguments confuse motive with intent. Even if the motive of a perpetrator is to drive a group off its land (“ethnic cleansing”), killing members of the group and other acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention can still have the specific intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part. That’s genocide. This tactic of denial was used by the International Court of Justice to deny that Serbia violated the Genocide Convention in its wrongly decided Bosnia v Serbia and Croatia v Serbia cases. The ICJ held that if there is any other intent such as “ethnic cleansing,” the specific intent of its acts cannot be conclusively proven to be genocide. Genocide must be the “Only Intent” of a state for the ICJ to conclude it violated the Genocide Convention. This reasoning treats genocide and forced displacement as mutually exclusive crimes. In fact, both crimes are usually committed together. This tactic is like saying that if a robber shoots and kills his victim, he cannot be convicted of murder because he also had the intent to rob the victim. This doctrine would deny nearly every genocide, because the acts of genocide always have multiple intents including displacement, confiscation of assets, torture, persecution, and destruction of a group. The “Only Intent” doctrine would deny every genocide, including the Holocaust. 11. Blame the victims. Claim that the Nigerian government is simply fighting an insurrection by a terrorist movement comprised of “bandits” who themselves commit the crimes. By portraying the situation as a two sided civil war, killing is seen as self-defense by one group against another group, rather than genocide. The Nigerian government appeals to this common misunderstanding that civil war and genocide are mutually exclusive. This mistake was made by the US Ambassador to Rwanda in 1994, who thought Rwanda was in a civil war, instead of a genocide. In fact, civil war is very often a predictor and correlate of genocide. Genocide occurs especially during civil and international wars because war is legalized killing, when even women and children of an adversary group are portrayed as enemies of the state. 12. Peace and reconciliation are more important than blaming people for genocide. This is the justification for amnesties for mass murderers as part of peace agreements, and for opposition to post-conflict tribunals. But peace and reconciliation are not alternatives to justice. Lasting peace requires justice. Without prosecution of those who commit genocide, an expectation of impunity is created. As Fein and Harff have shown, one of the best predictors of future genocide is previous genocide that has gone unpunished. Without trials, denial becomes permanent. Conclusion A brutal civil war by jihadist terrorists against Christians and moderate Muslims is underway in Nigeria. The genocide against Christians is gradual. It is what genocide scholar Helen Fein called “genocide by attrition.” A settlement negotiated in Abuja might save lives. But the talks could take years. Meanwhile there will be peace in Nigeria only with a restructured Nigerian military, possibly augmented by an African Union force, supported logistically and financially by the West. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Religious Freedom should not censor her findings in deference to pressure from the Nigerian government. Diplomatic politeness must not become an excuse for denial or sanitizing of the facts of religious persecution and genocide in Nigeria. Human Rights groups around the world will expect a forthright report that reveals the truth about threats to religious freedom and the jihadist terrorists that are committing genocide in Nigeria. This memorandum may be freely republished in its entirety without alteration with credit to Genocide Watch.

Genocide is Never Justifiable: Israel and Hamas in Gaza By Grace Condon and Frankie Condon Republished from post on February 4, 2024 This post was taken down by hackers. It was republished March 5, 2025. It is republished again June 2, 2026. The UN estimates there are 1.7 million displaced people in Gaza, many of whom have fled the fighting around Khan Younis. Source: Reuters The 7 October assault by Hamas on Israel enacted long-established genocidal intent by Hamas against the people of Israel. Under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter every state has the right to defend itself against attack and to protect its people against the threat of genocide. However, crimes against humanity and genocide undertaken by one organization or state should never be used by another state or organization as justification for retaliatory crimes against humanity, war crimes, and acts of genocide. We note Israel’s asymmetrical warfare in Gaza. Israel has committed multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity. Its warfare has also included many acts of genocide. Israel launched its first strikes against Gaza on 27 October 2023. Prior to its first assault, Israeli Defense Forces called for over a million Palestinians in northern Gaza to evacuate to the south within 24 hours. Electricity had been cut, making electronic communications difficult across Gaza. Humanitarian aid organizations argued that the timeline was too short for so many civilians to be moved away from the field of war. The Israeli Defense Forces then released a second message to Gazans stating: "Urgent warning! To the residents of Gaza: your presence to the North of Wadi Gaza is putting your lives at risk. Anyone who chooses not to evacuate from the North of the Gaza Strip to the South of the Gaza Strip may be identified as a partner in a terrorist organization." Since Israel’s invasion began, humanitarian organizations and the world press have reported the widespread bombing of civilian targets, including but not limited to apartment complexes, mosques, roads used by civilians to escape the fighting, and hospitals. At this writing, over 1.7 million people in Gaza have been displaced since October 7. Over 26,000 civilians have been killed. According to the United Nations, of the civilians killed over ten thousand (41%) are children and over 6500 (25%) are women. At least 200 medics and more than 135 UN staff have been killed. None of these dead could possibly be considered combatants. How much "collateral damage" justifies killing so many children? When is "collateral damage" so disproportionate that it makes thousands of children orphans? The World Health Organization has issued dire warnings about the threat of epidemics as displaced Palestinians are crowded together in tents and makeshift shelters without sanitation facilities and clean water. The WHO has called for orders of protection of humanitarian personnel following detentions of medical personnel at Israeli checkpoints. Genocide Watch bases its analyses of genocides on our understanding that genocide is a process that unfolds in stages. Each stage is, itself, a process, and the progression of stages may be non-linear and recursive. That is, stages of genocide may overlap, occur simultaneously, or repeat. The stages of genocide defined and elaborated by Genocide Watch President, Dr. Gregory Stanton, are described more fully on the Genocide Watch website. Israel has long made a practice of classification and discrimination against Palestinians. With regard to classification which involves the denial of citizenship and the rights and protections attending citizenship, Haaretz reported in 2022, that since 2002 the Israeli Ministry of Population and Immigration Authority has made the application for citizenship in Israel increasingly difficult for Palestinians. Only 38% of the 16,573 applications for Israeli citizenship by Palestinians during the last two decades have been approved. Although 39% of the population of Jerusalem were Palestinian in 2022, only 5% of those were Israeli citizens. The Israeli Ministry of Population reports some of the most common reasons for denial: failure to demonstrate primary residence and employment in Jerusalem; lack of fluency in Hebrew; refusal to renounce citizenship in Jordan; criminal records; security concerns. Refusal of citizenship for Palestinians living in Israel means that they are not permitted to vote, ensuring political disempowerment. Palestinians without citizenship cannot obtain passports and are denied certain jobs. Adi Lustigman, a lawyer representing Palestinians seeking Israeli citizenship, says noncitizenship denies Palestinians in Israel the security that accompanies citizenship. " In a world of nation-states.there is no protection for human rights and no personal security without citizenship.” . In February of 2022, Amnesty International issued a report charging Israel with maintaining an apartheid system against Palestinians. Amnesty International found that Israel has intentionally created a system of domination and oppression that includes “territorial fragmentation; segregation and control; dispossession of land and property; and denial of economic and social rights.” Such practices combine classification and discrimination to create a hierarchical system of oppression like the apartheid system in South Africa or the old segregation system in the southern United States. Political rhetoric by Israeli government and military leaders has crossed the line from expression of righteous anger to the rhetoric of dehumanization and polarization. Since the 7 October assault by Hamas on Israel, Israel’s political leaders and Israeli Defense Forces have repeatedly used dehumanizing and polarizing language to refer to Palestinians. Israel's President, Isaac Herzog, stated that “an entire nation out there is responsible” for the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas.” “The ‘rhetoric’ about innocent civilians is ‘absolutely not true.’ The Peoples Dispatch quotes Israel's Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, referring to Palestinians as “human animals.” and boasting of having “released all the restraints” on Israeli forces. Minister Gallant asserted,"we will eliminate everything’ in Gaza.” The Israeli army’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, Major General Ghassan Alian said that “human animals must be treated as such.” Dehumanizing language is often used to justify war crimes and genocide. The People’s Dispatch quotes Israeli army spokesperson, Daniel Hagari, proudly announcing the dropping of “thousands of tons of munitions” on Gaza in the first days of the war. He asserted,“We’re focused on what causes maximum damage, rather than ‘accuracy'." Major General Alian informed Gazans that “there will be no electricity and no water, there will be only destruction.” The Peoples Dispatch reported that in late October, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu compared Palestinians “with the biblical enemy of the Jews, the Amalekites." Netanyahu quoted from 1 Samuel 15:3, in which Samuel tells King Saul, "Thus says the Lord of hosts, 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way, when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them; but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’” In 1 Samuel 33, after Israel has slaughtered all the Amalekites, Samuel himself summoned Agag, the Amalekite king. Samuel then personally "hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal." This Biblical passage is a divine order to commit genocide. That the President of Israel invoked this divine mandate for genocide is evidence of his genocidal intent to destroy in part the Palestinian people of Gaza. The historical parallel is precise: Palestinians in Gaza live in nearly the same area as the ancient Amalekites. The preparation stage of genocide involves both militarization and indoctrination of citizens with fear of the threatening group. Four wars by its neighbors since 1948, all aimed at annihilating Israel, have required Israel to maintain its military in a state of constant alert. Israelis are justifiably fearful of the genocidal intentions of Hamas, as proven by its 7 October attack. Political rhetoric by Israeli government and military leaders is now aimed at generalizing fear of Hamas to a fear of the Palestinian people as a whole. Israel's deployment of its Defense Forces in Gaza and in “police actions” in the occupied West Bank portend a bleak future for Palestinians. Israel's protection of Israeli settlers' confiscation of Palestinian land, and the IDF's toleration of settler assaults on Palestinian families in the West Bank are reminiscent of the forced deportations of indigenous populations in the U.S., Australia, Armenia, Myanmar, Bosnia, Darfur, and Artsakh. The Palestinian people in Gaza now suffer persecution at the hands of the Israeli Defense Forces. Israel has long tolerated and actively encouraged the illegal expropriation of Palestinian lands by settlers in the West Bank. Israel now seems intent on forcing Gazans into smaller and smaller enclaves in tent cities in Gaza without clean water, food, fuel, or healthcare. Famine and disease are spreading, with children, women, and the elderly suffering the greatest danger. Palestinian men and boys have been rounded up, stripped of their clothing, marched through the streets, and imprisoned without charge. Survivors of a December round up report being blindfolded and tortured before being released without explanation. Israel’s political leaders, including Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, vehemently deny any violations of international law, asserting that the war by Israel must continue until Hamas is totally defeated. The Israeli military regularly releases videos of Hamas-built tunnels as justification for their ongoing operations in Gaza. These are the signs of the genocidal process in Israel's war in Gaza: Israel's leaders persist in conflating all Palestinian people with Hamas. [classification]; Israel’s leaders incite genocide against Palestinians by dehumanizing Palestinians as “human animals” and by summoning Biblical justification for genocide [dehumanization, polarization]; Israel collectively punishes all Gazans for the actions of Hamas. Israel’s leaders deny that there are any innocent civilians in Gaza. This falsehood denies any duty to obey the laws of war, which require avoidance of attacks on civilians. [dehumanization, polarization]; This collective punishment is used to justify the bombing and killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian women, children, and noncombatants, including at least 85 journalists [persecution, extermination]; Israel has forcibly displaced 1.7 million Gazans from their homes into tent cities [persecution]; Israel bombs and assaults hospitals where wounded civilians seek medical care and shelter [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs and attacks areas in Gaza to which it has directed civilians for their “safety” [persecution, extermination]; Israel bombs “escape routes” it has designated for Palestinians fleeing Israeli attacks [persecution, extermination]; Israel's blockade and siege of Gaza is producing widespread famine [persecution, extermination]. Together, these actions demonstrate intent to commit genocide, the intentional destruction in part of the Palestinian people of Gaza. Until the Israeli invasion of Gaza ends with a permanent ceasefire, Israel will continue to commit four of the acts of genocide enumerated in Article 2 of the Genocide Convention: Israel's carpet bombing of Gaza, including of so-called "escape corridors," and "safe areas" to which it has directed Gazans, is intentionally killing members of the Palestinian ethnic and national group. Israel's displacement of 1.7 million Gazans and its blockade of food, water, fuel, and healthcare is causing serious bodily and mental harm to members of the Palestinian ethnic and national group. Israel's blockade of food, water, and fuel, its destruction of eighty percent of Gaza's homes, and its destruction of all but seven of Gaza's hospitals is deliberately inflicting on the Palestinian group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. Israel's bombing has destroyed most of the hospitals of Gaza where Palestinian mothers could safely give birth to their babies, thus imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. There is a growing consensus among international lawyers that Israel is perpetrating a genocide against the Palestinians of Gaza. A United Nations panel held by the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) recently concluded with a determination that Israel’s war against Gaza is genocidal by intent. We urge: an immediate, permanent ceasefire, release of all hostages held by Hamas, lifting of the Israeli blockade of Gaza, deployment of United Nations peacekeeping troops to Gaza, Arab and Palestinian recognition of the legitimacy of the State of Israel, U.N. and international support for a sustainable diplomatic resolution to the conflict. The need for these actions grows increasingly urgent with each passing day as political instability grows across the Middle East. The U.N., U.S., Israel, Arab League, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, European Union, NATO, and other powers must not allow this crisis to widen into a regional or international war. https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/genocide-is-never-justifiable-israel-and-hamas-in-gaza

A wounded girl in Nasser hospital, Gaza on Tuesday after Israeli forces allegedly opened fire on Palestinians gathering to receive supplies in Rafah. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images Genocide Emergency The Israel Defense Force Is Murdering Civilians Seeking Food in Gaza July 1, 2025, republished June 2, 2026 Since 27 May 2025, the Israel Defense Force has killed over 410 Palestinians who were seeking food at distribution sites organized by Israel and the USA. These were not accidental deaths. They were intentional. Israeli forces were ordered by their commanders to open fire on unarmed civilians. The daily shootings show that these murders were Israeli government policy. These murders were war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide. Numerous videos show Israeli forces intentionally opening fire on unarmed civilians. View the footage here, here, and here. These killings were not “collateral damage” from combat. They were murders. Victims tried to reach four food distribution centers run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a joint venture of Israeli government and U.S. contractors. GHF was established following three months of an Israeli blockade of food and fuel to Gaza. The people seeking food were starving. Save the Children says more than half of those killed were children. Many children were shot in the head. Palestinians must choose between starvation or being shot by Israeli snipers. Genocide Watch and more than a dozen other human rights groups have condemned these killings as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) described the GHF’s distribution sites as 'slaughter masquerading as humanitarian aid.' Israel is forcing Palestinians seeking food to walk through war zones controlled by Israeli Defense Forces. Humanitarian relief groups and the U.N. remain in Gaza. But Israel will not allow them to distribute food directly to the people, as they did successfully before the Israeli blockade. Israel blocks or denies permission for their life-saving aid missions. Israel launched its war in Gaza in retaliation for the Hamas murders of 1200 Israelis and taking of 250 hostages on October 7, 2023. A rigorous study in The Lancet estimates that 64,000 Palestinians have been killed by bombing, shelling, shooting and other direct attacks during the ensuing war. Intentionally directing military attacks against a civilian population is a war crime under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and Article 8(2)(b)(i) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Israel is a party to the Geneva Conventions. Palestine is a party to both the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the ICC. Israel’s blockade of food to Palestinians is a war crime, the crime against humanity of extermination under ICC Article (7)(2)(b), and an act of genocide under Article 2(c) of the Genocide Convention and Article 6 (c) of the ICC Statute (“deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.)” Israel’s crimes fall under the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, and courts of countries with universal jurisdiction for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. They are also crimes under the laws of Israel. Israel has military courts that should try those responsible for these war crimes. These crimes were publicized openly every day and were surely ordered or assented to by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and by Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz. For their command responsibility, both men should be charged, arrested, and tried by Israeli courts, the International Criminal Court, and courts in countries with universal jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Genocide Watch recommends: The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation must be replaced by the U.N. and NGOs to distribute food aid directly. Israel must permit the U.N., humanitarian groups, and journalists to operate freely throughout Gaza. Israel must conduct a genuine investigation into these murders and prosecute those responsible. Israeli officers who ordered these murders must be identified, arrested, and tried by Israeli military courts. Israeli leaders’ war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide must be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court. All states must assist the ICC in investigating and prosecuting these crimes. States should become intervening parties in South Africa’s case against Israel for violation of the Genocide Convention in the International Court of Justice.

Gaza destroyed credit: Bashaar TALEB/AFP via Getty Images Israel’s Twelve Tactics of Denial By Dr. Gregory H. Stanton and the Genocide Watch Taskforce on Gaza (first published May 2025, updated to June 2026) Introduction Israel was founded after the Holocaust as a nation-state where Jews could have a homeland and defend themselves. However, the territory granted to Israel was already occupied by Palestinians as well as Jews. UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947 partitioned Palestine and designated part of it as the new state of Israel. Votes by the United States, France, the Soviet Union and their allies passed the resolution by 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions. Eight Muslim UN members, India and Cuba opposed the resolution. The UK, China, and eight other states abstained. Arab and other Muslim states rejected the creation of Israel because its territory was taken from part of Palestine. 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from Israel under pressure from Zionist paramilitaries or Israeli military forces. Dozens of massacres targeted Palestinians and 600 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Most of the 700,000 Palestinians resettled in refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and especially the Gaza Strip. Neighboring Arab states have fought four major wars to destroy Israel since 1948. They have sponsored thousands of acts of terrorism against Israeli citizens. Hamas, Iran, and Hezbollah have fired thousands of missiles into Israel, killing hundreds of Israeli civilians. In 2025, only ten Muslim nations recognize Israel: Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Turkey, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Eritrea, Senegal, Chad, and Burkina Faso. Twenty Muslim nations have never recognized or established diplomatic relations with Israel: Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Oman, Djibouti, Somalia, Comoros, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Cuba and Iran withdrew their recognition. Nine countries have recognized but have broken bilateral relations with Israel. THE HAMAS GENOCIDAL MASSACRE OCTOBER 7, 2023 Hamas is a genocidal terrorist organization. Hamas and its supporters like Iran deny the Holocaust and openly declare their intention to destroy Israel and exterminate Jews. They have openly stated that destruction of Israel is their goal. In the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust on October 7, 2023, Hamas and Islamic Jihad massacred over 1200 Israelis in the area adjoining Gaza. They took 251 hostages. Most were Israelis. Five were American citizens.148 have been rescued or released, 82 have been confirmed killed in captivity. At least 36 of these were murdered by Hamas. Many hostages were starved, tortured, raped, and kept in cramped underground tunnels for weeks. THE DEEP STRUCTURE OF ISRAEL'S RESPONSE Three deep structural foundations of Israel’s response to the October 7, 2023 massacre underlie the motivations for Israel’s destruction of Gaza and Israel’s denial that it is committing genocide. They are Holocaust Prevention, Israel’s Divine Destiny, and Self-Defense. HOLOCAUST PREVENTION: Hamas must be defeated to prevent another Holocaust. The Holocaust exterminated six million Jews. As the new nation legally created by the United Nations to be a homeland for Jews after the Holocaust, Israel’s primary national duty is to protect Jews. That priority outweighs all other national purposes. “Never Again” is the ultimate justification for Israel’s self-defense against the Arab nations that have tried to destroy Israel in four major wars. It is the motivation for Israel’s retaliation against the relentless genocidal terrorism of Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Black September, the Palestine Liberation Organization and other adversaries determined to destroy the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. ISRAEL’S DIVINE DESTINY: God gave Jewish people Judah and Israel, including Gaza and West Bank. Many Zionists believe that the nation of Israel was granted to the Jewish people by God. They trace this faith to the promises made by God in the Torah, the sacred Hebrew scriptures. The Torah affirms that Jews have a divine right to live in Israel. The original borders of Israel included ancient Judah and Israel before the Roman Empire expelled the Jewish people from their God-given homeland. Those ancient Jewish territories included Gaza and the West Bank. Jewish settlers in the West Bank claim that they are only re-settling areas that belong to Jews by divine right. They assert an Israeli “divine destiny,” much like the “manifest destiny” that European settlers of the Americas claimed. A similar divine destiny was claimed by some American colonialists, who believed that God gave them the right to conquer the Americas, drive native Americans off their land, and rule over America’s indigenous peoples. The most recent expression of this creed is “Christian nationalism.” Ultra-Zionist Jews claim they have a God-given right to occupy Gaza and the West Bank. They assert their divine right to conquer Palestinians, bring all of ancient Judah and Israel within Israel’s borders, and defend Jewish settlements within those borders. This divine justification for Israel’s expansion is often found among the 700,000 Jewish settlers who now occupy Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Some settlers consider this “divine destiny” to be a powerful justification for conquest and forced deportation of Palestinians. In the Gaza war, it has become a justification for genocide. Many other Israelis believe it, as well. An independent poll conducted in January 2025 showed that seventy percent of Israelis support annexation of “Judea and Samaria” (the West Bank) into Israel and oppose establishment of a Palestinian state there. A majority of Israelis oppose a “two-state solution” to the conflict. However, Israeli support for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s policies is far from monolithic. Some Israeli groups advocate redirecting Israeli government policies away from destroying Hamas in Gaza to stopping the war, returning Israeli hostages, and making peace with Palestinians. SELF-DEFENSE: Israel has a right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. With the justification of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Israel’s invasions in Gaza and Lebanon were intended to destroy the bases of Hamas and Hezbollah before they could be used for more attacks on Israel. Israel also justifies its invasion of Gaza as necessary to free Israeli citizens who are being held hostage. This right to protect national citizens has long been a doctrine of international law. Prime Minister Netanyahu justifies killing Hamas terrorists as necessary to protect Israeli lives and the lives of other civilized people in the Middle East. Israel’s self-defense is necessary to defeat Hamas and protect the Jewish homeland. Netanyahu’s logic is utilitarian. Killing Hamas terrorists is necessary to prevent them from murdering more Israelis. This moral logic removes the ethical conflict between killing and protecting life. It relieves responsibility for the war from Israelis and Israel’s supporters. The western world has largely sided with Israel in its war to destroy Hamas. The European Union, the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, Canada, and most South American nations have accepted Israel’s assertion of its right to self-defense. However, except for the United States, all members of the UN Security Council have condemned Israel's continuing starvation and destruction of Gaza. Israel and its allies consider self-defense to be a legitimate justification for Israel’s response to the mass murder, rape, and other acts of genocide perpetrated by Hamas on October 7, 2023. Has Israel’s retaliation against Hamas for its 7 October 2023 genocidal massacre been in accord with international law? If Israel had invaded Gaza only to hunt down the perpetrators of the October 7 Hamas attack, it could claim proportionate retaliation under the laws of war. Instead of invading Gaza and flooding or attacking Hamas in its tunnels, Israel has bombed all of Gaza and attacked the entire Palestinian population. [Flooding the tunnels was rejected because it would also drown Israeli hostages.] Israel’s bombing has destroyed Gaza so completely that almost no habitable dwellings remain. Israel’s retaliation has gone far beyond any possible interpretation of international law. Israeli bombing has killed over 62,000 Palestinians. Israel has not limited its bombing to Hamas combatants. It has bombed the entire civilian population of Gaza. Israel has destroyed 92 percent of housing units and 70 percent of all structures in Gaza. It has targeted hospitals, maternity clinics, feeding centers, refugee camps, medical and relief personnel. Israel has blocked all food aid to Gaza for over seventy days (as of May 21, 2025), since Israel ended its ceasefire with Hamas. The blockade has resulted in acute malnutrition and starvation among children. The UN has called such withholding of food “cruel collective punishment.” Starvation is a war crime under the 4th Geneva Convention Article 23 to which Israel and 195 other nations are state parties. Starvation is also a war crime under Article 70 of Optional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and Art. 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Starvation constitutes the crimes against humanity of persecution under Article 7 (1)(h) and extermination under 7(2)(b) of the ICC Statute. It is an act of genocide under Genocide Convention Article 2(c) and Rome Statute Article 6(c). Is Israel committing genocide in Gaza? Genocide Watch has concluded that Israel has committed all five acts of genocide enumerated in the Genocide Convention. Israel’s war and destruction of the Palestinian population of Gaza exemplifies all ten stages of genocide. Please read Genocide Watch’s careful analysis of the conclusive evidence of genocide by Israel in our report: Genocide is Never Justifiable. The Panel of Experts in International Law convened by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, UN Special Rapporteurs convened by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Genocide Watch, and other reputable human rights organizations have also concluded that Israel is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza. Israel’s Denial: Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Israeli cabinet, the Israeli press, and Israel’s allies deny that Israel’s carpet bombing, blockade of food, and destruction of hospitals, maternity centers, and fertility facilities in Gaza constitute genocide, the intentional destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian ethnic and national group. The rhetorical strategies of denialism are evidence of genocidal intent. This report documents each of the tactics of denial used by Israel. The report is based on statements by Israeli leaders, the Israeli press, and Israel’s defenders. Israel’s denialism illustrates all twelve tactics of denial outlined by Dr. Israel Charny and summarized by Dr. Gregory Stanton in his essay, Twelve Ways to Deny a Genocide. The Twelve Tactics of Israel’s Denial 1. Minimize deaths. All statistics from Hamas or the UN are exaggerations. 2. Attack truth-tellers. Critics are “antisemitic”, liars, or Hamas sympathizers. 3. Deny intent. Civilian deaths are unintentional “collateral damage” in self-defense. 4. Dehumanization. Palestinians are “animals” who support terrorism and genocide. 5. Blame Ancient Conflict. The war continues ethnic conflict since Biblical times. 6. Blame mistakes. Civilian deaths are mistakes, accidents, or acts against orders. 7. Claim appeasement. Critics are appeasing Hamas killers, rapists, and genocidists. 8. Justify arming Israel. Arming Israel is legal. It supports Israel’s self-defense. 9. Claim good treatment. Palestinians are treated well and receive enough food. 10. Legalism. Israel’s attacks don’t fit the legal definition of genocide. 11. Blame the victims. Hamas terrorism justifies defense of Israel’s Jewish people. 12. Peace trumps justice. Making peace outweighs justice for genocide. 1. MINIMIZE DEATHS: All statistics from Hamas or the UN are exaggerations. Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed over 62,000 Palestinians, including over 17,000 children. Hamas says the real figure is far higher due to thousands of Gaza residents who are missing, buried under the rubble of destroyed buildings, and presumed dead. Israel claims that half of those killed in Gaza were combatants. Independent experts say that only 25% were combatants. In addition to misrepresenting the number of Palestinian civilians killed in Israel’s assault on Gaza, Israeli officials routinely blame the high number of civilian casualties on the actions of Hamas. They deny that Israel has intentionally targeted civilians. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman Peter Lerner said after an Israeli offensive that killed 274 Palestinians, “Every civilian life lost in this war is a result of how Hamas has operated.” Israeli officials question all statistics on Palestinian deaths provided by the Hamas Health Ministry, citing Hamas’ monopoly control over Gaza. They claim that all Hamas statistics are dishonest exaggerations of Palestinian fatalities for Hamas propaganda purposes. 2. ATTACK TRUTH-TELLERS: Critics are “antisemitic”, liars, or Hamas sympathizers. In response to international backlash against Israel’s assault on Gaza, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israeli officials accuse critics of “antisemitism” and support for anti-Israel Hamas terrorism. They claim that the United Nations and UNRWA, the UN agency supporting Palestinian refugees, support Hamas. Addressing the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu stated “Until this antisemitic swamp is drained, the UN will be viewed by fair-minded people everywhere as nothing more than a contemptuous farce.” Israel has accused UNRWA workers of supporting terrorism and involvement in the Hamas October 7, 2023 attack. Israel has ignored the findings of the United Nations investigation into Israel’s accusations against UNRWA. The UN investigation found evidence that only nine UNRWA employees were assisting Hamas. The UN immediately fired them. Israel ignores this decisive UN response because Israel’s narrative portrays the UN as uniformly opposed to Israel. Since the ICC charged Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant with war crimes, articles in Israeli and US conservative media have noted that the ICC charges were brought after ICC Prosecutor Khan learned he would be investigated for non-consensual sexual misconduct with an ICC staffer. These attempts to discredit the charges brought by the ICC ignore the fact that the charges were approved by the ICC’s Pretrial Chamber before any accusations of misconduct against ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan were made. It is true that antisemitism is a real threat to Jews and is on the rise globally. The reality of antisemitism and its impact on Jews is deplorable. However, accusations by Israeli leaders that the UN, ICC, human rights groups, and other critics of Israel are “antisemitic” remain unproven. Genocide Watch, for example, has a consistent record of vigorous opposition to all forms of antisemitism. Genocide Watch’s stalwart support for Israel’s legitimate right to exist and its self-defense against terrorism and eliminationism by Iran, Arab, and other Muslim states is strong. Yet Genocide Watch’s careful legal analysis has concluded that Israel is committing genocide. 3. DENY INTENT: Civilian deaths are unintentional “collateral damage” in self-defense. Israel blames the high numbers of civilian casualties in Gaza on Hamas, arguing that Hamas combatants use civilians as human shields. Israel claims its Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) take all necessary precautions to diminish the toll on civilian life. Hamas fighters hide among Palestinian civilians, making civilian deaths unavoidable. Israel claims the number of civilian deaths is proportionate to the difficulty of defeating Hamas terrorists hiding among the Gaza population. In response to these Israeli claims, UN observers note that most of the precautions Israeli officials point to are evacuation orders. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OCHA, reports that over 80% of residents in the Gaza Strip are under evacuation orders. The IDF says these evacuation orders are due to Hamas military activity within humanitarian zones. UN observers respond that evacuation orders have not prevented the disproportionate killing of civilians. The evacuation orders also contribute to the massive displacement of Palestinians and the overcrowding of designated “humanitarian zones.” 4. DEHUMANIZATION: Palestinians are "animals" who support terrorism and genocide. The history of the conflict between Israel and Palestine has been marked by xenophobia, racism and dehumanization. The dehumanization has been characteristic of both sides. Israel claims that destruction of Gaza and resulting civilian casualties are a necessary and justifiable cost of the Israeli effort to defeat and destroy the terrorist group Hamas. Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant claim that there are “no innocents” among Palestinians. They deny any distinction between Hamas combatants and Palestinian civilians. Israel’s former U.N. ambassador Dan Gillerman described Palestinians as "inhuman animals". Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced a “total siege” of Gaza, cutting off water, food, and electricity. Gallant referred to Palestinians as “human animals.” The dehumanization of Palestinians has included: Denying most Palestinians Israeli citizenship. Refusing to recognize Palestinians’ property rights in Israel and the West Bank. Supporting confiscation of Palestinian land to build Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Requiring Palestinians working in Israel to endure long border checks and carry permits, reminiscent of the passes South African blacks had to carry during apartheid. Bulldozing Palestinian homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank. Cutting off food to Gaza, causing malnutrition and deaths of Palestinian children. Destroying most hospitals and maternity centers in Gaza. Israel’s supporters slander critics of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. They are vilified as "immoral", "antisemitic" "sympathizers with terrorists". 5. BLAME ANCIENT CONFLICT. The war continues ethnic conflict since Biblical times. Israeli officials have explained massive Palestinian civilian casualties and the destruction of Gaza as the inevitable continuation of the ancient conflict between the Jews of Israel and the ancestors of Palestinians, the Amelekites, who also lived in Gaza. On October 28, 2023, three weeks after October 7, Netanyahu equated Israel’s response to the Hamas genocide with Israel’s response to the Amalekites in Deuteronomy 25: 17 -19: “17 Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey out of Egypt, 18 how he attacked you on the way, when you were faint and weary, and struck down all who lagged behind you…19 Therefore …you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” In 1 Samuel 15:3, God’s orders are overtly genocidal: “Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” The logic of irresolvable differences explains war as the unavoidable result of ancient ethnic conflict. 6. BLAME MISTAKES. Civilian deaths are mistakes, accidents, or acts against orders. Explanations of civilian deaths by Israel are blamed on acts of individual soldiers rather than on the orders of military leaders. This tactic denies that mass murder and destruction are Israeli state strategies. War crimes against Gazans are described as acts of individuals, not the result of Israeli policies. For example, the March 23, 2025 murders of fifteen Palestinian medics by IDF soldiers were blamed on "professional failures” and a "breach of orders" by IDF commanders. Israeli military officials often base this excuse for war crimes on the “fog of war.” IDF soldiers have admitted to excessive feelings of power when entering Gaza. Reporting on IDF atrocities capitalizes on such admissions. Although individual IDF soldiers have shown a “chilling disregard” for human life, IDF commanders and the state of Israel deny that war crimes and genocide are state or military policy. Israeli officials say that alleged “war crimes” committed by Israeli soldiers should be investigated as crimes of individuals rather than as the result of state or military policies. 7. APPEASEMENT: Critics are appeasing Hamas killers, rapists, and genocidists. Israel’s leaders and allies have sought to portray the state of Israel as blameless. When Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant were charged by the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor with the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts, the US Congress and President Trump adopted legislation sanctioning officials of the ICC, citing the ICC’s “illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and our close ally Israel.” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted that “Israel has consistently sought peace with the Palestinians,” placing blame on the Palestinian Authority and Hamas for rejecting peace efforts. Other states, including Canada, officially affirmed Israel’s “right to live in peace with its neighbors,” prioritizing a rhetoric of peace over accountability and international law. In contrast, European Council President António Costa and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said these US sanctions were attempts to intimidate ICC officials and undermine the legitimacy of international criminal justice institutions. 8. JUSTIFY ARMING ISRAEL: Arming Israel is legal. It supports Israel’s self-defense. The US and European nations have avoided criticizing Israel out of solidarity with their own Jewish populations. They also want to atone for their profound guilt for not preventing the Holocaust. In the US, Jewish Americans form large voting blocs in key states. They are an influential economic, educational, and political group. The US and EU nations avoid criticizing Israel, a kindred democracy, trading partner, and ally. While some Israeli corporations have been complicit in genocides in other countries, they justify their actions by claiming legality, the private sector’s response to market supply and demand. Many governments have engaged with Israel due to its robust economy. Normal economic trade is justified by respect for Israeli sovereignty. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is one of Israel’s most vocal critics, but that has not stopped nine percent of Israel’s crude oil imported from Brazil. 9. CLAIM GOOD TREATMENT: Palestinians are treated well and receive enough food. By portraying Palestinian civilians, including children, as terrorists, any food offered to the Palestinian people by Israel and its allies is deemed to be “generous.” Shortages of food are blamed on “looting” by Hamas and by criminal gangs. In fact, Israel has not permitted any food to enter Gaza for over seventy days, since the end of the temporary ceasefire. Most families in Gaza currently eat just one meal a day, or less. Children are dying of malnutrition every day. President Trump’s proposal to expel Palestinians from Gaza and annex the contested region has been lauded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who stated: “The actual idea of allowing Gazans who want to leave to leave. I mean, what’s wrong with that?” Not only would such forced displacement be a crime against humanity under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, but resettlement has also been rejected by every Middle Eastern nation President Trump has proposed to relocate Gaza Palestinians. 10. LEGALISM: Israel’s attacks don’t fit the legal definition of genocide, which requires “specific intent to destroy the whole Palestinian people.” The defense that Israeli killing and destruction in Gaza fails to fit the legal definition of genocide is the favorite of lawyers. It has many forms. It is based on denial of Israel’s “intent to destroy” a substantial part of the Palestinian national and ethnic group. Many who have not read the Genocide Convention think genocide can only be proven if the intent is to destroy a whole people. But the Convention clearly states that intent to destroy part of a people is enough to prove genocide. Arguing that this is a civil war against Hamas and that war is mutually exclusive from genocide ignores that fact that most genocides occur during civil or international wars. Claiming that the intent of Israel is self-defense, not genocide, ignores the fact that many genocides, including the Holocaust have been justified by their perpetrators as necessary to defend against subversion, aggression, or invasion. The International Court of Justice in Bosnia v Serbia and Croatia v Serbia, held that if there is any other intent besides destruction of a group, such as “ethnic cleansing” (forced deportation), this other intent precludes conclusive proof of the intent to commit genocide. Israel’s defenders claim that Israel’s intent is self-defense, not genocide. Such misinterpretation of state intent in the Genocide Convention is like saying that if a robber shoots and kills a victim, he cannot be prosecuted for murder because he also had the intent to rob his victim. Claiming that response to aggression justifies all violent reactions, even if they are disproportionate, is a profound distortion of the laws of war. Israel’s rules of engagement permit twenty or more civilian deaths for each combatant death. They are the most extreme in any war since the firebombing and nuclear attacks of World War II. Claiming that Israeli leaders have made no statements advocating destruction of the Palestinian population of Gaza is simply false. There are over 500 recorded instances in a database of statements by Israeli politicians, officers, and other public figures that show incitement and intent to commit genocide in Gaza. A systematic pattern of acts of genocide is also sufficient to prove genocide. The invasion of Rafah has now been added to hundreds of other acts of genocide, such as the destruction of hospitals, maternity centers, refugee camps, feeding centers, blocking of food supplies resulting in starvation, and the murders of relief and medical personnel. 11. BLAME THE VICTIMS: Hamas terrorism justifies defense of Israel’s Jewish people. Israel blames victims and survivors in Gaza for voting Hamas into power. Many Israeli citizens express little or no sympathy for Palestinians, presenting them as a monolithic group of Hamas-supporters instead of a diverse population with many views, including opposition to Hamas. In fact, among Palestinians, opinions vary widely. Polls show that although many Gazans support Hamas for resisting Israeli oppression, only a minority support continued Hamas control of Gaza. Most Palestinian civilians are not Hamas terrorists. Many Palestinians are unaware of the horrors of October 7th. Most have not seen videos of the massacre. Many believe Hamas propaganda that claims evidence of the October 7th assault was manufactured by Israel. 12. PEACE TRUMPS JUSTICE: Making peace outweighs justice for genocide. The claim that peace and reconciliation are more important than justice would obstruct accountability for Hamas, for the Israeli Defense Forces, and for the Israeli government. It would support amnesty for the war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by both sides in this war. The UN has called for accountability on all sides, to break the cycles of violence and ensure lasting peace. The American Peace to Prosperity Plan of 2020 would move Israel’s capital to Jerusalem, permit further annexation of the West Bank, legitimize Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and make a two-state solution to the conflict nearly impossible. This American “peace” plan would fail to bring peace. It would also fail to achieve justice. In November 2019, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo overruled his department’s 1978 legal opinion that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are contrary to international law, saying the “establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law”. The following year, Pompeo said the decision on whether to annex the Palestinian territory of the West Bank was an Israeli one. Contrary to Secretary of State Pompeo, Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits Israeli settlements in the West Bank: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” Article 49 also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”. President Trump’s proposal for the U.S. to annex Gaza, move Palestinians out, and build a “Middle East Riviera” would not only violate UNGA Resolution 181, it would commit the crime against humanity of forced deportation under Article 7(1)(d) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Trump’s proposal has been rejected by most Palestinians, by every country where Trump proposes to relocate Gazans, and by nearly all experts on international law. This report has analyzed and given examples of the Twelve Tactics of Denial that Israel uses to deny it is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Gaza. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Hamas and Israel have committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. War and genocide will continue until Israel and Hamas conclude a permanent cease-fire enforced by the US, NATO, UN, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Hamas must release all remaining hostages NOW. Israel must end its genocidal blockade of food, fuel, water, and medicines to Gaza NOW. Israel must stop its bombing and genocidal destruction of Gaza NOW. Israel must defeat Hamas and Hamas must be excluded from future governance in Gaza. Israel should then fully withdraw from Gaza with security provided by the US, UN, NATO, and OIC. Hamas perpetrators should be brought to justice in courts with Universal Jurisdiction. Israeli officers who committed war crimes should be tried in Israeli courts. Leaders of Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and Israel should be tried in the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Israel, the US, EU, and Arab states should fund reconstruction and resettlement of Gaza. Israel should end its segregation and discrimination against Palestinians. Israel must stop expansion of settlements and persecution of West Bank Palestinians. Israel’s Arab neighbors and other Muslim nations must recognize Israel, confirm Israel’s legal right to exist in full security, and never again attack Israel, Israelis, or Jews. The war and genocide in Gaza must stop NOW, before they this war takes another human life. Further Reading: Genocide Watch encourages readers to educate themselves about the processes of genocide. We encourage critical thinking about genocide and the actions of Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, the US, UN, EU, Arab nations, Lebanon, Syria, Russia, and China. We recommend articles about Israel and Gaza at: https://www.genocidewatch.com/ as well as the following articles: https://www.ajc.org/news/israel-is-not-committing-genocide https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/defense-minister-announces-complete-siege-of-gaza-no-power-food-or-fuel/ https://theintercept.com/2024/02/07/gaza-israel-netanyahu-propaganda-lies-palestinians/ https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/12/middleeast/icj-israel-gaza-hamas-genocide-hearing-hague-day-two-intl/index.html https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/23/israel-gaza-war-wwii-palestine https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament/ Dr. Gregory H. Stanton is Founding President of Genocide Watch and the Alliance Against Genocide. He founded the Cambodian Genocide Project. He was Professor in Genocide Studies at George Mason​ ​ University and was James Farmer Professor in Human Rights at the University of Mary Washington. He was President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. He was a law professor at Washington and Lee University. In the State Department, he wrote the UN Resolutions that established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. He wrote the rules of the Khmer Rouge Tribuna​​l. He holds degrees from Oberlin, Harvard Divinity School, Yale Law School, and a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago.

By Michał Jagielski Senior Middle East and Iran Analyst Genocide Watch Syrian Kurds protesting outside a U.S.-led international coalition base near the Turkish border in Syria. Photo: Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images A decade after the establishment of CJTF-OIR, it appears that the alliance between the U.S. and the SDF is at an end. Initially, the Kurdish-led forces were the most reliable ally for Washington’s multilayered Syrian policy aimed at countering ISIS and the growing influence of Moscow and Tehran. Years-long exposure to U.S. weaponry and training have shaped DAANES and SDF into competent entities, capable of governing diverse territories, although not without occasional sectarian favoritism. The U.S.' reliance on its Kurdish allies and the costs they had to pay in their fight against ISIS have, in the eyes of many, warranted a seat at the negotiating table for the Kurds. Yet the recent changes in Syria’s domestic situation have revealed that U.S. policy has been utilitarian rather than ideological. The policy towards the Kurds and their quest for increased autonomy has been motivated by strategic interests. The U.S. has supported the Kurds in their goals when those goals served Washington’s political objectives. This attitude has created a cycle of short-term empowerment of the Kurds, followed by periods of instability, repression, and diminishing autonomy. That is not to say that U.S. policy in the region is opaque. On the contrary, the objectives are predictable, based on President Trump's "America First" foreign policy. What changed is not the underlying reasoning behind Trump's policy, but the alliances by which it is achieved. When compared to how the Kurds were treated under the Assad regime, their situation has improved because of U.S. support. Al-Sharaa’s offers to the Kurds would have been unimaginable 15 years ago. Nevertheless, a large portion of the Kurdish community in Syria and its leadership expected more, believing that the alliance with the U.S. would bring about a level of lasting autonomy. The example of the SDF has the potential to put future alliances between regional ethnic minorities and the U.S. in doubt. Full report: