The Importance of the International Genocide Scholars’ Decision
Follow-up, Hamza Ali, Progress Center for Polices
Introduction:
On September 1, the world’s leading organization of genocide scholars issued a decision declaring that Israel’s conduct during its nearly two-year war in Gaza meets the legal definition of genocide. This move by the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) adds to the growing number of legal experts warning that Israel has committed war crimes in its conflict with Hamas in the besieged Palestinian territories.
The decision, adopted by IAGS—which has around 500 members—stated that the Israeli government has “engaged in systematic and large-scale crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide, including indiscriminate and deliberate attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure” in Gaza.
According to Palestinian health officials, the Israeli assault has killed more than 63,000 people, displaced most of the enclave’s 2.1 million residents, and caused widespread famine. Timothy Williams, second vice president of IAGS and assistant professor at the Bundeswehr University in Munich, explained that while the resolution is largely symbolic, its importance lies in the collective voice of genocide scholars. He said:
“The Association believes there is great value in the largest group of genocide scholars saying: ‘Yes, we believe this is genocide.’”
Williams also stressed that genocide is ultimately a legal category to be adjudicated in courts—but he acknowledged its highly political nature, especially in the case of Gaza.
⸻
Implications of the Statement:
The announcement aligns with a broader trend of expert commentary in Western media throughout August, highlighting Israel’s accelerating global isolation:
• Bloomberg Analysis (mid-August):
Warned that “Israel is heading toward an isolation it cannot afford.” The article argued that Israel has rarely been so humiliated and highlighted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s longstanding opposition to a Palestinian state. It added that Netanyahu’s stance is not an outlier but reflects a deeper societal shift: Israel’s ruling coalition increasingly represents ultra-religious Jews, settlers, and groups embracing absolutist views on Arabs and territorial expansion. According to the analysis, this trajectory undermines Israel’s image as a secular, liberal democracy in the Middle East—an image now beyond repair.
• New York Times (August 1):
Echoed the same concern. “The conventional Israeli view is that this crisis is just another temporary problem,” said Freliechan Sacks, an Israeli policy analyst. “But misreading the world accelerates the global shift against Israel—with dramatic consequences.” Chuck Freilich, former Israeli deputy national security adviser, added that Netanyahu has been far too slow to recognize the reality and costs of this shift, bluntly warning that Israel “has become, or is on the path to becoming, an international pariah.”
• The Conversation (August, by Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle East Studies, Australian National University):
Argued that Israel now faces a profound crisis of international credibility, one that could take decades to recover from. This is not mere rhetoric—the material signs of isolation are already visible.
• The Telegraph (August 29):
Reported that Israeli food exports to UK supermarkets have dropped sharply amid a consumer boycott led by pro-Palestinian activism. Imports fell by 17% in the first half of 2024 compared with the previous year, with products such as avocados, tomatoes, carrots, and couscous—frequent targets of boycott campaigns—showing the steepest declines.
⸻
Conclusion:
• The IAGS statement of September 1 should be understood within this broader trajectory of mounting isolation. It is not just an academic declaration but a warning: the world’s leading genocide scholars have formally joined those labeling Israel’s actions as genocide. This carries weight not only in legal debates but also in shaping public perception, diplomatic relations, and consumer behavior.
• What is unfolding is not a passing controversy but a structural realignment of Israel’s place in the world. For decades, Israel relied on the assumption that international criticism would fade with time. Today, that assumption is collapsing. From academic institutions to major Western media to global markets, the consensus is hardening: Israel is no longer viewed as a besieged liberal democracy, but increasingly as an aggressor outside the bounds of international law.
• Recognizing the significance of the IAGS decision is part of understanding that a possible turning point has already been reached.
