INTERVIEW: Why Oct. 7 should be considered genocide

In a recent interview with VOZ, Avraham Shalev, a senior research fellow at the Kohelet Foundation, a Jerusalem-based nonpartisan research and action institute, offered an in-depth analysis of why the massacre perpetrated by Hamas in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, should be classified as genocide. In addition, Shalev addressed the accusations against the Jewish state and the international narratives that, according to him, distort the reality of the conflict.

The definition of genocide and the ideology of Hamas

Shalev explained that, according to the Genocide Convention of 1948, a genocide involves acts such as mass killings with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a specific group. In this context, he noted that the ideology of Hamas, an Islamic jihadist organization, views the Jewish presence in Israel as inherently illegitimate. Its 1988 founding charter promotes the elimination of Jews as part of a religious and existential goal, using antisemitic language that includes traditional conspiracy theories.

Shalev stressed that the acts of Oct. 7, 2023, which included the murder of hundreds of civilians, sexual violence, torture and humiliation, reflect a clear intent to dehumanize Jews, meeting the criteria for genocide.

"Reverse genocide accusation" against Israel

The researcher also addressed the accusations of genocide leveled against Israel for its response to Hamas' attack. According to Shalev, these accusations are part of a historical pattern of "reverse genocide accusation," where perpetrators accuse victims to justify their actions. He compared this tactic to historical cases, such as the Nazi claims that Jews wanted to destroy Germany or Russian accusations against Ukraine. In addition, he pointed to the phenomenon of the "Holocaust inversion," which since the 1950s has compared Israel to the Nazis, a narrative that seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state.

Shalev argued that these accusations ignore the magnitude and brutality of the Hamas attack, in part because Israel, out of respect for the victims, has not widely disseminated images of the Oct. 7 atrocities. This contrasts with the media coverage of the devastation in Gaza, which reinforces the perception of the Palestinians as perpetual victims, depriving them of responsibility.

The international response and the reward for terrorism

One of the most critical points of the interview was Shalev's criticism of the response of the international community. Countries such as France and Australia, among others, have expressed intentions to recognize a Palestinian state, which Shalev considers a "reward" for Hamas' genocide. He quoted Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Hamas official, who claimed that the Oct. 7 attack sought to revitalize the Palestinian cause. According to Shalev, this narrative is working, as Hamas' popularity among Palestinians has grown, and many see the attack as a step toward statehood.

Shalev stressed that countries have an obligation under the Genocide Convention to prevent and punish such acts. However, he noted that sponsors of Hamas, such as Iran and Qatar, do not face sufficient legal or international consequences. He proposed that international pressure be brought to bear against these countries and that the criminals of the Palestinian Islamist group be prosecuted under national and international laws against terrorism and genocide.

The future of Gaza and Israel's role

On Israel's handling of the conflict, Shalev highlighted the challenge of balancing two objectives: the release of the hostages (of whom 20 remain in Hamas' hands) and the defeat of the terrorist organization. He criticized the slow pace of military operations, motivated by the desire to protect the hostages, but argued that prolonging the conflict damages Israel's international legitimacy due to the images of devastation in Gaza.

Looking ahead to the "day after" the conflict, Shalev was clear: Israel should not cede control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority, which he accused of supporting and financing terrorism and promoting antisemitism. Instead, he advocated an Israeli security checkpoint and a process of deradicalization of Gazan society, recalling that Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 led to the election of Hamas and, ultimately, to the Oct. 7 attack.

Final reflection

The interview with Avraham Shalev highlights the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the narratives surrounding it. His analysis underscores the need to recognize the genocidal nature of Hamas' actions and to address the distortions in the international perception of the conflict.

In Shalev's eyes, the international community must fulfill its legal and moral obligations to prevent and punish genocide, rather than reward the perpetrators with political concessions. Otherwise, the conflict will be perpetual.