public

Are there well-founded reasons to believe that Israel is attempting to eradicate the Palestinian population in Gaza?

(A legal-evidence brief, with sources)

Thesis

Yes. There are credible, documented grounds—from the UN Commission of Inquiry, the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) provisional measures, major human-rights organizations, UN humanitarian bodies, and even Israeli NGOs—that Israel is committing acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, Palestinians in Gaza. Israel rejects this characterization; the ICJ’s merits judgment is pending. But the existing public record already meets the bar for reasonable grounds to believe genocidal intent and conduct are present. (OHCHR)

1) What genocide requires (and what it doesn’t)

Legal definition (Genocide Convention, Art. II): any of five prohibited acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group (killing; causing serious bodily/mental harm; deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction; preventing births; forcible transfer of children). The Convention does not require total annihilation or a specific “speed” of killing. (United Nations)
Proving intent: The ICJ allows intent to be inferred from a pattern of conduct where genocide is the “only reasonable inference” (Bosnia v. Serbia). (International Court of Justice)

Implication: “Trying to eradicate” can be evidenced by policies that make survival impossible (siege, starvation, water denial, healthcare collapse), even if destruction unfolds over months or years—not days. (United Nations)

2) Evidence category A: Official statements indicating destructive intent

Total siege policy announced 9 Oct 2023 (“no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel”). (Times of Israel)
April 2025: Top ministers reiterate no humanitarian aid will enter Gaza; Ben-Gvir: “no reason for a gram of food or aid to enter Gaza.” These statements tie policy to withholding life-sustaining resources. (Reuters)

These statements are the very type the ICJ and UN bodies examine as direct or circumstantial evidence of genocidal intent. (International Court of Justice)

3) Evidence category B: Pattern of conduct that destroys conditions of life

Starvation & blockade: UN OCHA documents closure of crossings since March 2, 2025, preventing entry of food, fuel, chemicals for water treatment; aid operations widely suspended or slashed. (OCHA OPT)
Fuel denial → systems collapse: UNRWA and OCHA report no fuel allowed in for months, crippling hospitals, bakeries, desalination and sewage plants; WHO warns fuel/aid scarcity is lethal. (UNRWA)
Famine and mass malnutrition: IPC classifies Gaza in Emergency (IPC 4) with confirmed famine and high risk of spread; WHO: people are “starving, sick and dying” as aid is withheld. (IPC Info)
Deliberate water deprivation & WASH destruction: HRW’s 179-page report concludes extermination and acts of genocide via intentional denial of water and destruction of water/sanitation infrastructure. (Human Rights Watch)
Concentration & depopulation plans: HRW (May 2025) warns of a plan to flatten infrastructure and force the entire population into a tiny “humanitarian area,” describing an escalation toward extermination. (Human Rights Watch)

These are classic examples of Article II(c): deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about destruction. (United Nations)

4) Formal findings to date

UN Commission of Inquiry (2025): Finds Israel committed genocide in Gaza (four of five genocidal acts) and cites explicit statements + conduct as evidence of intent; names senior officials for incitement. Israel rejects the report. (OHCHR)
ICJ (Jan, Mar, May 2024): Orders provisional measures based on a plausible risk of genocide and directs Israel to ensure food, water, fuel, medical aid—orders multiple UN bodies say were disregarded. Merits judgment pending. (International Court of Justice)
Israeli NGOs (July 2025): B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights–Israel publish reports concluding Israel is committing genocide; Amnesty International highlights these as a milestone. (B’Tselem)

5) Addressing the “If they really intended eradication, they’d do it in two days” claim

This argument mistakes method for intent:

Genocide by conditions of life (starvation, water denial, medical collapse) is slower but no less genocidal. The law anticipates this pathway; it does not require instant mass killing. (United Nations)
“In whole or in part” means destroying a substantial part (e.g., a population within a territory) suffices; completion is not required. (United Nations)
Constraints (hostages, international pressure, operational and diplomatic costs) can slow the tempo without negating intent or criminality. What matters is the pattern of acts + policy statements showing the destruction of the group as such. (Human Rights Watch)

6) What remains contested (and what doesn’t)

Contested: Israel’s government denies genocidal intent and frames actions as lawful self-defense against Hamas; it disputes responsibility for the humanitarian collapse and says sufficient aid is entering. Legal merits at the ICJ are unresolved. (Reuters)
Not really contested in UN data: Extended aid blockades, fuel denial, famine classifications, and collapse of life-supporting systems. These are documented across OCHA, WHO, UNRWA, IPC—independent of any one NGO’s view. (OCHA OPT)

7) Bottom line

Given (i) explicit policy declarations constricting life-sustaining aid, (ii) a sustained pattern that engineers starvation, thirst, disease, and medical system collapse, and (iii) authoritative findings (UN COI; ICJ provisional measures; HRW; Israeli NGOs), there are strong, fact-based reasons to believe Israel is attempting to destroy, at least in part, the Palestinian population in Gaza—that is, attempting eradication in the sense contemplated by the Genocide Convention. Dismissing this as a “conspiracy theory” ignores the public record amassed by mainstream institutions. (OHCHR)