For those who are unacquainted with the specifities of the international humanitarian law (IHL), the key is to remember that it aims to protect civilians, humanitarian and medical workers during armed conflicts by its three key principles i.e. distinction (separating civilians from military targets), proportionality (avoiding excessive harm to civilians), and humanity (prohibiting unnecessary suffering and cruelty). IHL was established through the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, along with the 1977 and 2005 Additional Protocols, to set international standards for safeguarding those affected by war. There was consensus amongst the international community that the primary purpose of IHL was to mitigate the catastrophic effects of armed conflict for "humanitarian reasons".
While, "humanitarian reasons" are grounded in the principles of protecting human dignity, alleviating suffering, and promoting well-being, most of the international community's support for Israel has overlooked these fundamental values, rendering the term rather elusive in the context of Gaza. One of the many examples of this reality being starkly underscored is the discovery— following the superficial ceasefire agreed on January 15, 2025—of the SOS Children’s Village in Rafah, Gaza, a recognised humanitarian center, to be completely obliterated. The residential facilities that were once the ‘home’ of orphaned children, were reduced to rubble, forcing both the orphans and their caregivers into prolonging their stay in temporary shelters which are shamefully notorious for being plagued by acute shortages of food, water, and sanitation due to Israel’s blockade of humanitarian aid, and mass scale destruction of the infrastructure. The deliberate destruction of a facility designed to safeguard the most vulnerable demands a critical inquiry: Under what justification could the abode of orphaned children be classified as a legitimate military target?
Also an examination of the principle of proportionality of IHL, which aims to protect ‘civilians and civilian infrastructure against expected incidental harm from an attack that is excessive to the military advantage anticipated from the attack’, exposes the dark reality of Israeli’s operations in Gaza, post-October 2023, which are a flagrant departure from the basic tenets of IHL. The scale and intensity of the destruction bear no alignment with the fundamental tenets of proportionality, underscoring a complete disregard for established norms of IHL.
The sheer scale of devastation and indiscriminate targeting of civilians shatters any pretense of proportionality, exposing a grim reality that defies not just logic, but unfortunately also humanity
Although a crude analysis, a cursory look at the statistics suggests that 1 Israeli life is as valuable as 42 Palestinian lives (Israel death tolls has been reported to be 1139, while the Palestinian casualties have been reported as 48237 by Al-Jazeera). The criminality does not end there; 70% of the Gazan casualties are estimated to be women and children as verified by the United Nations (UN) while 90% of the housing units have been destroyed. Even if we give the advantage of uncertainty to Israel that Gazan women were active combatants, how does one justify the slaughter of newborns? Were these infants also terrorists? The sheer scale of devastation and indiscriminate targeting of civilians shatters any pretense of proportionality, exposing a grim reality that defies not just logic, but unfortunately also humanity.
Analysing the civilian casualties, the destruction of infrastructure, forced displacement, and obstruction of humanitarian aid, Amnesty International's 2024 report, "You Feel Like You Are Subhuman," concludes that Israel is indeed committing genocide in Gaza. While, Israel’s military offensive has annihilated entire multigenerational Palestinian families, as per the UN and Amnesty International, powerful nations have stood with it, subjecting innocent Palestinians to collective punishment for the actions carried out by Hamas. As of now, Hamas is designated as a terrorist organisation by the US and other countries, but it may be delisted in the future if vested political interests dictate it—much like the evolving consideration around Hayat Tahrir al-Sham after the siege of Syria by Al-Sharaa.
From the lens of history
Even biased and selectively framed historical accounts concede that with the exception of the Crusader period, Palestine was under Arab and later Ottoman rule for over 1,300 years after the Byzantine era. Its population was primarily Semitic Arabs, both Muslims and Christians, with a small Jewish minority. By 1917, under British occupation, Jews made up less than 10% of the population, while Arabs, mostly Muslim (80%) and Christian (10%), constituted the overwhelming majority, shaping Palestine’s dominant culture.
Britain, as we know, played a decisive role in reshaping Palestine during its mandate (1917–1948). After seizing control from the Ottoman Empire, it implemented policies that systematically exacerbated tensions between Arabs and Jews. The 1917 Balfour Declaration, which supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, directly contradicted earlier British assurances of Arab independence. British rule facilitated increased Jewish immigration, fuelling Arab resistance, most notably the Arab Revolt (1936–1939). Although Britain attempted to curtail Jewish migration through the 1939 White Paper, mounting global and Zionist pressures— particularly after World War II—intensified the conflict. By the late 1940s, escalating violence between Jewish and Arab groups, alongside attacks on British forces, made Palestine unmanageable. Britain, conveniently referred the issue to the United Nations, which proposed a partition plan in 1947. Arabs rejected the plan, while Jewish leaders accepted it. Britain withdrew in 1948, leading to the declaration of Israel’s independence and the Arab-Israeli War; a conflict which continues today. Unless there are alternative facts, Palestine belongs to its indigenous Arab population which is not just a historical fact but a reality reinforced by centuries of continuity, demographic evidence, and the principles of self-determination. No occupation, forced displacement, or political manoeuvring can erase the legitimate claim of Palestinians to their land.
As of now, the Palestinian population is around 4 million, exceeding that of many UN member states. About 500,000 live in Israel, 1.2 million in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, and the rest in exile, with many in refugee camps or as foreigners in other countries. The majority of exiled Palestinians still aspire to return to their homeland. So, no matter which lens you look at the Gazan genocide from, Israel comes out as the aggressor. If the mere possession of advanced weaponry grants a state the strategic justification to unleash indiscriminate force and military dominance, then who, anywhere in the world, can truly be safe? As for Britain, much like Germany confronted its historical responsibility toward the Jewish people, it must too find the courage to acknowledge its role in the reckless policies that have led to the deaths and displacement of hundreds of thousands and issue a long-overdue apology.