How many acts of genocide does it take?

two unsurprising reports on the genocide of Palestine and a typical State Department dismissal

Thank you for visiting Narrative Nation.

Some of these posts will be incorporated into the book I’m developing with the working title “Loads of Heresy”: Far Right Revisions of the American Narrative. This story is not directly a part of my book material, but it connects to my work by reflecting on the language we use to describe important cultural and political issues. As such, it’s part of my ongoing effort to record and reflect on the ways our nation’s story is being told.

---

About two months ago, I posted a story on the appropriateness of the term “genocide” to describe Israel’s destruction of the people, the infrastructure, and the future of Palestine. At that time, the genocide had been going on for a year.

Today, I am adding some information about two important reports released this week that shore up the term, along with some of the media coverage surrounding them. I know that today we have severely important stories to follow regarding the overthrow of Assad and the future of Syria, but I hope readers can also make room to keep up with the ongoing tragedy in Palestine.

Amnesty International:

On Dec. 5, 2024, Amnesty International released a 294-page report with an accompanying film, entitled “‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza. The report reviews the ICJ definition I relied on in my first story—the same legal definition we should all be working with—along with an explanation of how the organization analyzed the evidence.

The report is posted here on the Amnesty International site.

A feature about the report, including part of the film, is available here on Democracy Now, what has been for me one of the most valuable sources of information and in-depth discussion of this question.

Some of the evidence includes direct statements of intent from Israeli military and government officials, alongside videos of soldiers celebrating the destruction of Palestine with the same language.

images courtesy of Amnesty International and Democracy Now!

On the December 6th Democracy Now segment, Palestinian legal researcher Boudour Hassan stated,

If there is any country that had the capacity, the power, and the tools to stop this genocide, it is the United States.

I appreciate her not-too-cynical predication that the same government officials denying it today will soon be taking fees to give speeches on how the U.S. knew it and did nothing and could not do anything. Democracy Now host Amy Goodman connected this government refusal to the way Madeleine Albright and Bill Clinton refused to acknowledge the genocide in Rwanda 30 years ago. Later they apologized, but, as Hassan noted, how will the victims read such apologies?

---

Lee Mordechai, Israeli historian:

Also this week, a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem released an important update on his report produced earlier this year entitled “Bearing Witness to the Israel-Gaza War.” Lee Mordechai’s report is available in Hebrew and English, and contains over 1400 footnotes with a database containing thousands of pieces of evidence.

images courtesy of Middle East Eye @ https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israeli-historian-produces-vast-database-war-crimes-gaza

You can access the full PDF at the link above or see the menu of sections Mordechai has released and updated over the last year. One of the appendices explains why the term “genocide” is applicable.

Like Amnesty International, and as I cited in my earlier post about this, Mordechai has applied the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’s 1948 definition to the evidence we have from within both Israel and Palestine:

Based on the available evidence as of writing, I believe that Israel has attempted to do some combination of: (1) remove Gazans from the Strip, especially its northern parts; (2) make large parts of the Strip uninhabitable, hoping that this would contribute to the former objective; and (3) kill Gazans through direct violence, starvation, or prevention of aid or support, at least partially as part of the de facto policy of revenge, and at least partially as a way to facilitate the removal of Gazans from the Strip. I interpret the policy of using starvation as a weapon of war – acknowledged at least since December by some NGOs¹ and now widely by international officials and lawyers² – as an attempt to bring about the physical destruction of Gaza as a political entity and population group, particularly to further the objective of cleansing Gaza from its inhabitants. The wholescale destruction of targets with no military value such as archives, libraries, universities, mosques and heritage sites – as well as the broader destruction of the civilian infrastructure as well as over half the buildings throughout the Gaza Strip – all contribute to the objective of making Gaza uninhabitable. (Mordechai, “Appendix 1 – The reasons underlying my definition of Israel’s actions in the war as genocide.”)

Mordechai posted this part of his report back in June.

This is not a problem that was finally noticed this week. As Zeteo News’ Prem Thakker asked a State Department spokesperson named Vedant Patel,

How many acts of genocide does it take to make a genocide?

images courtesy of Democracy Now!

True to form, the State Department spokesperson’s vapid dismissal of the issue provided no plausible counter-argument or preferred definition for what’s happening in Palestine:

I appreciate what you’re trying to do with the way that you phrased that question, but let me just say again unequivocally that the allegations of genocide, we find to be unfounded.

We can and must do so much better than this. How can we save ourselves or anybody else without looking directly at the problem to call it by its name?

---

Below is the original post I made in October. It hardly seems necessary for me to make this case, given the overwhelming evidence. And I know there are severely important stories about Syria for us to follow this week.

But I want to be on the record. I want every American to be on the record as this nation funds and provides rhetorical cover for Israel’s slaughter of a population. I also hope my small audience of 250 subscribers and however many others readers find this would share it, if my words here are useful, or share some of the reports and links I’ve included throughout with the people who need to see them.

Oct 17, 2024 post:

Words do matter. Sometimes they get in the way, and sometimes they can save us. Collective understanding can be stalled and sidetracked by unproductive arguments over the correct terms. But shared definitions and classifications can move an essential conversation forward.

In current discussions of Israel and Palestine, there is significant social and political pressure to use terms like “humanitarian crisis” instead of “genocide.” Indeed, we’re now seeing people use asterisks to hide the “G word” from bots that may be crawling social media sites to remove posts. Here I want to reflect on why we need to use both terms because they describe two fundamentally distinct aspects of what Israel is doing and what the world is witnessing.

My starting place is last week’s CNN interview with two doctors who have been in Gaza trying to save victims of Israel’s relentless slaughter of Palestinians. During a segment designed to look at the issue one year after the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel, the corporate media giant’s anchor Kate Bolduan interviewed Thaer Ahmad and Tanya Haj-Hassan. When Bouldan referred to the situation in Palestine as a “humanitarian crisis,” Dr. Haj-Hassan immediately stopped the conversation to correct that terminology.

Here is the 3-minute clip from the longer segment in case you missed it. I’ll discuss her definitions of “humanitarian crisis” and “genocide” below.

Haj-Hassan defined “humanitarian crisis” in this way:

. . . a humanitarian crisis is what you deal with when you have a hurricane, what you deal with when you have an earthquake. This is not a humanitarian crisis.

I don’t think the doctor's definition of "humanitarian crisis" is quite broad enough, but the point about the Palestinian genocide happening in front of us stands, and that was her purpose.

Here is UNICEF’s definition:

A humanitarian crisis is defined as any circumstance where humanitarian needs are sufficiently large and complex to require significant external assistance and resources, and where a multi-sectoral response is needed, with the engagement of a wide range of international humanitarian actors.

This broader description validates CNN’s use of the term; it does help to describe part of what we’re seeing in Palestine. The problem is that those who don’t want to recognize the genocide will defend “humanitarian crisis” as a term that is not only suitable, but also sufficient. But this humanitarian crisis wasn't caused by what some might call an act of God. It was and still is being caused by acts of the Israeli government enabled by acts of the United States government.

Dr. Haj-Hassan’s reasons for identifying this as a genocide include these factors:

When 70% of the population that are killed are women and children; when the population is starved of food, of water, of medicine; when you have attacks, repeated attacks on all the hospitals, the clinics, the aid distribution sites, the humanitarian aid agencies that tried to help—more U.N. workers have been killed in Gaza than in U.N.'s history—when you have over 900 families that have been exterminated, that have been taken off of the civil registry, killed; when you have over 17,000 children that have lost one or both parents; when you have bakeries, aid distribution sites, churches, mosques, schools, and in the last three days—in the last 24 hours in fact—a hospital today that was bombed . . .

The complicated interconnection of the humanitarian crisis and the genocide is captured in the International Court of Justice orders to Israel. In January the ICJ issued “provisional measures,” or “binding orders,” summarized here by Human Rights Watch:

to prevent genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, enable the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance, and prevent and punish incitement to commit genocide.

The Genocide Convention’s definition established in 1948 is as follows:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

There is no denying the applicability to Israel’s actions against Palestine. Criterion “d” is covered well enough by the knowing destruction of hospitals where pregnant women and newborns need lifesaving care. I don’t know of any examples of criterion “e” from the list above, but the rest of this is happening in Gaza at a massive and apparently increasing rate.

Aside from the results that can be observed, Israeli military and government officials have articulated their genocidal intentions on film and in writing. Israeli soldiers have posted many videos online—with impunity—cheering for the destruction of the Palestinian people beyond any supposed focus on strategic targets or Hamas fighters. The criteria have been met and surpassed—long ago. It’s cruel to say no, not quite or no, not because of pre-existing factors or no, because I have too much invested in the idea of Israel to admit this is where we are now.

This week, as Gazans face another impossible “evacuation” order, we see more language manipulation. Amnesty International calls these evacuation orders “Israel’s euphemism for forced displacement,” and no serious person can say this is not a genocide.

One reason it continues is resistance to the word. Genocide, Genocide, Genocide. If everyone would say it, maybe the world could do more to stop it. On CNN, Dr. Haj-Hassan reminded Bouldan of the media’s complicity, the complicity that happens when language choices suggest a false narrative:

And so it's really hard to hear it over and over and over again, framed in the way that it's being framed in the media, which, frankly, Kate, is very misleading . . .

History books will be written on this. And countries will have to reckon—media agencies will have to reckon—with their major role in the genocide of an entire population and in the destruction of humanitarian law and rule of order.

This statement cannot be minimized.

After all this time, we should not be debating which term to use—every day is an eternity for the people trapped in that hell and for the people outside who love them. Better public understanding is going to be part of the solution. The current extremity of the years-long humanitarian crisis in Palestine is the result of this genocidal surge, so the term should probably never be used alone when describing this situation. To put it another way, symptoms and causes should not be conflated, and of course both require an immediate response.

---

what choice we do have

Here’s a missed opportunity from the same day, the October 7th anniversary. In a televised ceremony at the VP residence, Kamala Harris dedicated a pomegranate tree while pledging to ensure Israel “has what it needs” and to “uphold the commitment to repair the world.” She quickly mentioned relief for the “immense suffering” of Palestinians, and everything else was about mourning Israeli lives, the American Jews killed that day, and the need to support Israel. She explained that the tree represents “righteousness” and “hope.” All things considered, not enough was said in this moment about Palestine.

You can watch Harris’s 2-minute dedication speech at this link. But also look at the screenshot of Harris to see headlines for some other stories NBC News ran the same week. The juxtaposition between a high official’s commentary and the primary footage of what Israeli violence has created is thought-provoking. I cried for the hundredth time looking at the impact of Israeli violence in Gaza and Lebanon, and that was a better use of my time than listening to Harris on this topic.

update: the following paragraph is now out-of-date because Harris lost the election. But I’m leaving it here for its relevance and a reminder of the stakes of genocide denial:

Don’t misunderstand me. I do want Harris to win this election because I think she gets so many things right and because it’s obviously the only way to keep Trump and Vance out of power. That’s essential not only for the United States but for the world. I’m also worried: as Emma Vigeland and Francesca Fiorentini noted on The Majority Report earlier this week, Harris may risk significant votes by sitting on what she feels or has been advised is the safe side of a line. Vigeland counsels Harris, “Just criticize Netanyahu, that’s all you gotta do. We’re not asking for much here.” Fiorentini reviews evidence that “the anti-war movement is growing within the Democratic Party” and warns those like Harris to take it more seriously.

As I am putting these notes together, I’ve just watched a Democracy Now interview with Josh Paul, who resigned last October from the U.S. State Department over its inadequate and dishonest response when we saw immediate signs of what was happening. Paul points out not only the inadequacy of Biden’s new call for Israel to do something about Palestinian starvation and suffering within the next 30 days, but also the misleading media coverage of what Biden has actually promised to do about it.

A reminder of the law is a vital part of this discussion, and understandably a lot of Americans don’t know much about this. First, Paul reminds us that the U.S. breaks its own law by providing “any form of assistance” to a country that restricts “the delivery of humanitarian assistance” provided by the U.S. Second, we must know that international law does not include any language about a 30-day waiting period to stop such violations.

Finally, media coverage and social media posts have said the U.S. is now suddenly threatening to cut off military assistance if Israel does not comply, but the language in this week’s warning does not really go that far. Josh Paul notes that the letter sent from the Biden administration only warns that “there could be consequences under Memorandum 20” and U.S. law.

So again we see American media language creating confusion—confusion in the U.S. government’s favor since people want to think those in power are going to do something about this— while the lives of millions in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, and neighboring countries are at risk. The American public is quietly led to believe this is the best we can do when headlines make that 30-day deadline look like tough talk. But of course it’s also permission to carry on for a while.

The protest movement has not been crushed by the severe responses to campus demonstrations over the last year. The historically significant protest organized by Jewish Voice for Peace outside the New York Stock Exchange this Monday shows how little confidence many people have in the US government withdrawing military aid to Israel. All in all, things are moving in more than one direction, and it looks like there are some breaking points on the horizon.

Jewish Voice for Peace led calls to end the genocide during the protest. Surely, the repair and relief Harris promised in her brief October 7th comments must begin by calling this what it is. How can righteousness be achieved without telling the truth? Where is hope for Palestine when the United States continues enabling Israel’s aggression in the region, consistently over many decades but especially now under Netanyahu? These italicized words were used by Harris in her Oct. 7th dedication.

Of course a great deal more is required to make a course correction regarding Israel and Palestine, but maybe the right words, and only if they are pointed in the right direction, could help to lead the way.