Shifting narrative: Why more Israelis are using the G-word

Arab News

2 days ago

https://arab.news/vk7q9
To what extent is the accusation that Israel has been perpetrating a genocide in Gaza bedding in and becoming a more mainstream part of the narrative? Perhaps more intriguingly, to what extent is this question being debated in Israel itself?
As ever, it was the Palestinians themselves who were among the first to sound the genocide 'alarm bell.' But they are not in charge of the narrative, and lack the permission to narrate their own suffering.
As the lawyer for South Africa, Blinne Ni Ghralaigh, said at the International Court of Justice in the Hague in 2024, this is 'the first genocide in history where its victims are broadcasting their own destruction in real time in the desperate, so far vain hope that the world might do something.'
Israeli officials do not face this test when portraying their own suffering. They do not have to wait for others to attest to it.
With this major caveat, there are shifts internationally and within Israel. This was brought into sharp focus last week when the Israeli author David Grossman announced that he now saw Israel's assault as a genocide, saying: 'I ask myself, how did we get here?'
This came after two leading Israeli human rights organizations, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel, joined the ranks of those bodies who have made this determination, namely that Israel is committing acts in Gaza 'with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,' in this case the Palestinians. These were the first two Israeli bodies to make this call, albeit almost 22 months into the process of genocide. But that shows a degree of ruthless research and debate that took place before making the judgment.
It is never easy for citizens from a state perpetrating genocide to admit to this crime. It is shameful. Those making the accusation will feel the coldest of shoulders, even downright loathing, from fellow countrymen. That is why hitherto the word genocide has largely been uttered only in private in Israel. Yet it may be the start of the undermining of the national Israeli consensus that permits genocide.
Within Israel, for obvious historical reasons, genocide is a highly sensitive term. Israel came into being in the aftermath of the Holocaust, arguably the most devastating genocide in modern history, industrial in scale, and brutally deliberate in intent.
Palestinians have been demonized and dehumanized.
Chris Doyle
B'Tselem's report was titled 'Our genocide is happening now.' It was unequivocal in tone: 'Israel is taking coordinated action to intentionally destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza Strip.' Two of the report's points stand out. First, that the genocide is built on the system of apartheid and Jewish supremacy Israel has applied over the territories it controls. This is a long-term practice. Second, the process of genocide is being perpetrated currently in Gaza, but could soon spread to other areas under Israel's control.
The two organizations join the major international human rights agencies Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International in making this accusation, as well as an increasing number of humanitarian aid agencies, such as Doctors Without Borders and Oxfam, that also have warned of the need to protect Palestinians from the risk of genocide.
The number of Israeli genocide scholars who deem Israel's actions in Gaza to be genocidal is growing. Omer Bartov has been in the forefront, having declared genocide one month after Israel launched its attacks on Gaza. Raz Segal, an associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Stockton University, described it as a 'textbook case of genocide' in October 2023. Amos Goldberg, a Holocaust studies professor from Israel, has used the G-word. Then, in May 2025, Israeli scholar Shmuel Lederman wrote that 'the second half of 2024 is the point at which a consensus formed among genocide scholars, as well as the human rights organizations community, that this is a genocide. Those who perhaps still had doubts — I estimate they dissipated following Israel's actions since the breaking of the ceasefire.'
These reports give extra credibility to those in the international arena demanding action to halt the genocide, and also to stop it spreading elsewhere, such as the West Bank. Initially those referring to genocide — even in the immediate aftermath of the ICJ ordering of provisional measures in January 2024 — were hammered. The push-back was fierce.
The overwhelming drive within Israel has been in favor of the war and all measures seen as necessary, including starvation. Palestinians have been demonized and dehumanized, and violence against them has been a staple part of mainstream discourse.
Internationally, many politicians, commentators, and reporters still refer to a war or conflict in Gaza. They still refer to two sides, as if there are two sides in a genocide. Such terms are long past their sell-by date. The erasure and extinction of Palestinian life in Gaza is on track.
Action cannot wait until the ICJ delivers its verdict, which may take some time. By that point, the Palestinian people will have suffered irreparable harm from this genocide.
• Chris Doyle is director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding in London. X: @Doylech