Azmat Ali
THE United Nations Human Rights experts last week (September 15) concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. Days earlier, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly endorsed Palestinian statehood, with 142 nations in favour. Together, these developments deliver a verdict: the world now formally recognises both the destruction of Gaza as genocidal and the denial of Palestinian sovereignty as untenable. What remains in doubt is whether the institutions that made these declarations have the will — or the power — to act.
Gaza’s Devastation
For more than seven decades, Palestinians have endured dispossession, occupation, and repeated military assaults. Since 7 October 2023, the scale of destruction has been intensified. Nearly 65,000 people have been killed, entire neighbourhoods reduced to rubble, hospitals dismantled, and water and sanitation systems destroyed. Gaza today is not a battlefield but a place deliberately stripped of the conditions needed for survival.
The devastation is measured not only in bombings but in hunger. In August 2025, famine — the gravest category of food insecurity — was officially declared. More than half a million Palestinians are now on the brink of starvation, with another million facing emergency conditions. Famine in Gaza is not a natural disaster but a “man-made” outcome of deliberate policy.
Genocide in Legal Lingo
International law defines genocide as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Legal and academic voices describe Gaza in precisely these terms. The International Association of Genocide Scholars has concluded that Israel’s actions meet the criteria of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, citing the systematic destruction of healthcare, education, and humanitarian infrastructure; the killing of thousands of children; and repeated rhetoric by Israeli leaders to “flatten Gaza.” Within Israel itself, B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights have echoed these conclusions, with Amnesty International reinforcing them.
The International Court of Justice, in a case filed by South Africa, has already ordered Israel to implement provisional measures to prevent genocidal acts and ensure humanitarian access. Israel has ignored these rulings, dismissing them as politically motivated. Yet genocidal intent can be inferred from systematic destruction, starvation, forced displacement, and the rhetoric of leaders. Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich’s claim that “Gaza will be totally destroyed” is not mere bluster in legal terms but probative evidence of intent.
Escalating Beyond Gaza
Israel insists its campaign is an act of self-defence against Hamas and rejects the jurisdiction of both the ICC and ICJ. Yet the evidence points to a campaign extending far beyond Hamas targets. Entire communities have been erased, food and medicine obstructed, and civilian infrastructure dismantled.
The conflict has also extended outside Gaza’s borders. On 9 September, Israeli warplanes struck Hamas officials in Doha, killing aides and provoking outrage across the Gulf. Qatar accused Israel of violating its sovereignty. Critics warn these attacks are extrajudicial executions that risk sparking wider regional conflicts.
Law Without Enforcement and
Legitimacy Without Power
International law derives its authority not from lofty declarations but from the willingness of states to uphold it. If genocide can be formally named yet ignored, then the very idea of a rules-based order collapses.
The General Assembly’s vote reflects the opposite dilemma: overwhelming legitimacy, but no power to enforce. Recognition of Palestine at this level does not halt bombardments, dismantle settlements, or lift the blockade. What it does achieve is to further isolate Israel as it is already shrinking its allies. The Security Council role remains pivotal in re-enforcing the concrete action. Law without enforcement and legitimacy without power reveal the fracture at the heart of the rule-based system.
For the Global South, this week is confirmation of what many have long argued: international law is applied selectively, shielding the powerful while disciplining the weak. For the West, especially the United States and its allies, it represents a crisis of credibility. How can Washington defend a rules-based order in Ukraine while undermining it in Palestine? How can Europe condemn Russian aggression under international law while enabling Israel’s bombardment in Gaza?
Long Shadow of Precedent
Genocide declaration does not fade away. Bosnia and Rwanda remain case studies in how failure to act on early warnings haunts international legitimacy. The finding on Gaza would cast a similar shadow. Future courts, historians, and diplomatic debates will return to this moment as the point at which the world knew — and choose whether to act or to look away.
The General Assembly’s resolution is more than symbolic. It cements Palestine’s status in the global imagination as a legitimate state-in-waiting. Even if recognition is not yet universal, the momentum is irreversible. Ireland, Spain, and Norway already granted recognition in May, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia and others did it on Sunday (September 21) are likely to follow and it would enable Palestine’s claim to shift from political demand to near-global consensus.
Consequences for Israel — and Beyond
For Israel, these developments mean not only intensifying diplomatic isolation but growing legal jeopardy. The genocide finding strengthens the case at the ICJ and increases pressure on the ICC to prosecute. States that continue supplying arms to Israel now face heightened risk of complicity. The reputational cost of association with a state accused of genocide will only grow heavier.
Beyond Israel, the implications reach the credibility of the multilateral system itself. If institutions cannot act on their own findings, their authority will be fatally undermined. Such erosion of trust will embolden authoritarian regimes worldwide, destabilising an already fractured order.
What Comes Next?
The immediate outcome of this week would not be an end to bombardment or the instant birth of a Palestinian state. The deeper outcome is a reckoning: states can no longer hide behind neutrality or silence. They must choose between upholding the principles drafted after World War II or abandoning them to expediency.
For Palestinians, the genocide declaration and the General Assembly’s vote together create a historical record that cannot be erased. Whatever the realities on the ground, the world has registered its verdict. For Israel and its allies, this is a warning: the legal and moral costs of continuing the campaign are mounting, and history will not absolve indifference.
The Breaking Point
Ultimately, this week is about more than Gaza or Palestine. It is about whether international law still carries force. If the genocide finding and the New York Declaration are left to gather dust, they will expose the hollowness of the world system. If they spark concrete action — prosecutions, sanctions, recognition, or peacekeeping — they could mark the beginning of an irreversible shift.
The true outcome lies not in the declarations themselves but in how the world responds. What is beyond dispute is that Palestinians are enduring one of the gravest humanitarian catastrophes of our time. The question now is whether the world still has the will to act or continue to ignore international law and human dignity.
This week has made one truth undeniable: silence is no longer an option.
_________________
Azmat Ali writes in English and Urdu, with a focus on literature, politics, and religion. Views expressed here are author’s personal. He can be contacted at rascov205@gmail.com and @azmata90_lle (Instagram ID)
