Gaza’s Ongoing Genocide: A Call for Immediate Global Action by Ihsan Adel and Katherine Gallagher


The events of 7th October was met by a total shock from the international community including Western officials and media, who apparently did not see any of this coming from an almost two decades of siege of more than 2 million people in an open-air prison marked as unliveable since 2020 by the UN. Ignoring this context, the international community inaccurately decided to view the starting point of this escalation as of October 7th, granting a green light for Israel to use its full power against the 2.2 million Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip, almost half of whom are under 18. Talks about self-defence for Israel dominated the rhetoric of Western politics, with minimal consideration for human lives and adherence to the rules of armed conflict, let alone the 56-year belligerent occupation and 16-year siege of Gaza. This constitutes a fundamental flaw in the appraisal of these events, and, consequently, the ability to address their root causes, as subtly alluded to by the UN Secretary-General during his recent address to the Security Council. This deviation from the western narrative, unsurprisingly, provoked Israel’s vehement protest, for this narrative contradicts the dehumanizing rhetoric that Israel relies upon to justify its genocidal actions.

The lessons of the Holocaust were meant to serve as safeguards against state violence and genocide, particularly for vulnerable groups like the Palestinians. What we are witnessing today, however, is an unprecedented global dehumanization campaign against Palestinians, pushing their narratives, experiences, and histories to the margins. Historically, the initiation of such campaigns has often been a precursor to genocide. Therefore, it is imperative to restore the Palestinian people humanity, recognize their shared history and rights, as a people, and put an end to the unfolding genocide happening before our eyes.

We are witnessing a rapidly growing anti-Palestinian sentiment not only in Israel but also in many European countries, clearly visible in how the authorities are dealing with demonstrations and support for the Palestinian people. It is incumbent upon the international community to address this with the same vigour as anti-Semitism, recognising the dangerous consequences that these actions entail.

While the 1949 Geneva Conventions require all state parties “to respect and ensure respect” of these conventions in all circumstances, the Genocide Convention places a legal obligation on every member state to prevent and punish even the attempt to commit this heinous crime, without waiting for it to fully manifest—a grim reality that we are witnessing today.

Continue reading at

Situation in the State of Palestine by Legal Representative of Persecution Victims, Katherine Gallagher

Please TAKE ACTION RIGHT NOW and send your letter to the UN Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the International Criminal Court Prosecutor.

As the alternate formulation for the crime of aggression makes clear – with the jurisdictional provisions that for State referrals or proprio motu investigations inter alia States Parties can opt out of accepting the Court’s jurisdiction over aggression by that State Party, and that the Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over non-States Party’s nationals or territory – States knew how to limit the Court’s jurisdiction vis-à-vis non-State Party nationals if they wanted; they wanted no such limitation for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Non-member States – including those who objected to the text of article 12(2) – are also on notice that the Court is vested with jurisdiction over nationals of non-member States for conduct that occurs on the territory of a State Party…
Article 12(2) of the Statute states clearly that the Court can exercise its jurisdiction over the crimes enumerated in article 5 when there exists a “special link” with the crime. The territoriality principle is one of the most widely accepted principles of international law. The construction of article 12(2) makes clear that the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction is not limited to either the territory of its Member States nor the nationals of such States; the ICC can exercise jurisdiction over the national of a State Party who commits a crime specified in article 5 of the Statue on the territory of a non-Member State when other preconditions are met, and likewise can exercise jurisdiction over nationals of non-Member States when they commit an article 5 crime on the territory of a Member State.

Continue reading at