Concerns Over the Recent Resolution Labeling Gaza Conflict as Genocide

As a member of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, I am deeply distressed by the organization’s recent resolution declaring the conflict in Gaza as a “genocide.”

The association, which consists of academics and researchers, seems to have tarnished its reputation through this decision. Despite paying membership dues, I believe the process lacked transparency and proper debate. Only about 128 of the roughly 500 members participated in voting, with no discussion held beforehand, and no comments or objections recorded on the organization’s listserv.

The resolution relies heavily on unverified claims and biased sources, amplifying unsubstantiated accusations made by Hamas and others. For instance, Hamas states that 58,000 Palestinians, including 17,000 children, have been killed, while the resolution claims Israel murdered 50,000 children—figures that are unfounded and exaggerated. The document disregards the distinction between combatants and civilians and echoes propaganda rather than scholarly analysis.

The resolution also erroneously suggests that organizations have changed their definitions of “genocide” to fit this conflict, which is misleading. Moreover, Israel’s efforts to deliver aid, provide water, and evacuate civilians demonstrate attempts to minimize harm, contradicting the genocide narrative.

Labeling this conflict as genocide diminishes the gravity of such accusations and sets a dangerous precedent. If Israel wanted to commit genocide, it wouldn’t be providing humanitarian aid or taking measures to protect civilians. Instead, such efforts contradict the narrative implied by the resolution.

Ultimately, this labeling appears to be a political stance rather than a reflection of scholarly consensus. The lack of transparency and selective presentation of information undermine the credibility of the organization and its members’ work.

As a former member, I believe the association should uphold rigorous standards and genuine debate instead of succumbing to politicized rhetoric.