.....as I really don't know enough about the technicalities myself.

For what its worth....the answer was maybe. Will the ICJ deem it so?

************************

Q: Do Israel’s actions in Palestine meet the definition of genocide?

A: That’s a very serious and complex question, and it depends on how one applies the legal and moral definition of *genocide*.

Under international law — specifically the **1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide** — genocide is defined as *acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group*, such as:

* Killing members of the group,
* Causing serious bodily or mental harm,
* Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s physical destruction,
* Imposing measures to prevent births, or
* Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Whether Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank meet that definition is actively debated among governments, scholars, and international bodies:

* **The case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ)** — brought by South Africa — alleges that Israel’s actions in Gaza could amount to genocide. The ICJ’s January 2024 ruling did **not** determine that genocide is occurring, but it found the claim *plausible* enough to order Israel to take preventive measures and report back on its compliance.
* **Israel and its allies (including the U.S. and most EU states)** reject the accusation, asserting that its military actions target Hamas — a group responsible for the 7 October 2023 attacks — not Palestinians as a people, and that civilian casualties result from Hamas’s use of civilian areas for military purposes.
* **Many human rights organizations and independent legal experts** argue that the scale of destruction, displacement, and rhetoric from some Israeli officials could indicate genocidal intent or at least acts consistent with genocidal patterns. Others, however, describe the situation as **war crimes or crimes against humanity** rather than genocide, because establishing *specific intent to destroy* a group is an especially high legal threshold.

So, in summary:

* The question of *whether* genocide is occurring remains **legally unresolved** and **contested**.
* The **ICJ is still considering** the full merits of South Africa’s case, and no final legal finding has been made.
* What is broadly agreed upon is that there is a **severe humanitarian crisis** in Gaza, with extensive civilian suffering and potential violations of international law.