A new study challenges genocide allegations against Israel, asserting that claims of starvation and civilian targeting in Gaza are based on flawed data and biased humanitarian narratives.
A recent study conducted by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University disputes claims that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. The report, titled “Debunking the Genocide Allegations: A Reexamination of the Israel-Hamas War” (2023-2025), argues that allegations of starvation, indiscriminate bombing, and deliberate civilian killings lack verifiable evidence.
The researchers contend that the narrative surrounding genocide has been fueled by unreliable data, uncritical sourcing, and a humanitarian system that is susceptible to manipulation. A central claim of the genocide accusations is that Israel has intentionally starved Gaza’s population. However, the study asserts that “claims of starvation prior to March 2, 2025, were based on erroneous data, circular citations, and a failure to critically review sources.”
While United Nations officials and human rights organizations have stated that 500 trucks of supplies per day were necessary to avert famine, prewar U.N. figures indicate that Gaza received an average of 292 trucks daily in 2022, with only 73 of those carrying food. According to co-author Danny Orbach, this supply was “completely adequate to meet demand.”
The study further claims that Israel consistently exceeded the necessary food supply during the conflict, averaging more than 100 trucks a day through March 2025. During a ceasefire-for-hostage deal, that number reportedly increased to approximately 600 trucks daily.
Orbach emphasized that the notion of Hamas not seizing humanitarian aid is “absurd,” noting that armed groups typically appropriate the majority of such supplies. “We have documents and testimonies proving Hamas did so,” he stated.
The report highlights how genocide allegations proliferate through what Orbach describes as an “inverted funnel of information.” Journalists and aid workers in Gaza often rely on translators and fixers affiliated with Hamas, whose accounts then filter into U.N. reports, mainstream media, and online platforms. “The average Westerner sees dozens of reports about Israeli crimes and assumes they must be true. But they all trace back to a handful of Hamas-affiliated sources,” Orbach explained.
Another contributing factor is what the study refers to as “humanitarian bias,” which leads organizations to exaggerate conditions in order to spur action. Orbach noted that organizations often warn of impending famine based on dubious facts, making questioning their narratives seem immoral.
While the study acknowledges that civilian deaths have occurred, it finds no evidence of a systematic policy of massacre by Israel. Citing data from the BBC, Orbach pointed out that between May 2024 and January 2025, only 2.1% to 3.5% of total casualties occurred in designated safe zones, despite half of Gaza’s population being concentrated there during that time.
Orbach stated, “That indicates the zones were relatively safe, despite Hamas using them to launch rockets.” The report underscores the importance of context, noting that Hamas has deliberately positioned itself in civilian areas, utilized human shields, and obstructed evacuations to increase civilian casualties and garner international condemnation of Israel.
“Hamas exposes its own people to danger intentionally so Israel will be blamed,” Orbach asserted.
Critics have accused the Israeli Air Force of conducting indiscriminate bombings; however, the study finds that strikes generally targeted military objectives, although civilian casualties were unavoidable. “The IDF is the first army in history to issue focused warnings, deliver large-scale aid into enemy territory, and sacrifice surprise to protect civilians,” Orbach remarked. “You cannot fight an enemy embedded in 500 kilometers of tunnels, dressed as civilians without massive destruction.”
The report also scrutinizes casualty figures released by the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, claiming they were manipulated to create misleading impressions regarding the demographics of the deceased. It presents alternative statistical models suggesting that combatant fatalities may have been underreported, skewing the civilian-to-combatant ratio.
The authors conclude that genocide requires a systematic intent to destroy a people—something they find absent in Gaza. “You don’t see the hallmarks of genocidal warfare here,” Orbach stated. “There are no campaigns of rape, frontal massacres, or close-range executions. In other conflicts in the Middle East, dozens of such atrocities occurred in just a few hours of fighting.”
Ultimately, Orbach and his colleagues argue that allegations of genocide against Israel rely on politicized narratives, selective data, and the exploitation of humanitarian discourse. “Analyzing devastation or civilian deaths without understanding Hamas’ tactics is absurd,” he concluded.
Source: Original article