There’s been an almost daily drip feed during the last few months of experts from around the world – genocide scholars – describing what is happening in Gaza as genocide. And of course, there’s been a push back from those who say that in this context, there is no way that Israel’s military activities should be interpreted that way. So how do genocide scholars come to the conclusions they do? What kind of evidence are they weighing? In the first episode of the new season we get right down to one of the big debates over the last few months – can what Israel is doing in Gaza be described as a genocide? 

We’ve been tracking the debates but we wanted to understand more, so asked associate professor at the University of Western Australia Melanie O’Brien, who we have had on the show before in relation to debates around genocide against the Uyghurs and Armenia and the Myanmar case at the International Court of Justice.

O’Brien goes through all the different elements that a law professor has to consider and explains why she came to the conclusion she has. She is also the president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars and she told us that colleagues had passed a resolution on the matter at the end of August. For us that’s another brick in the wall; again scholars have come to that conclusion. That news drew a lot of critique of the association. Genocide is always going to be controversial, wherever you put the label. This podcast is meant to look at how academics come to this conclusion.

For recommendations, a mix of materials from Melanie and Janet: American Made with Tom Cruise to get you understand the Nicaragua case at the ICJ; The Americans for KGB-watching; The Guardians by John Grisham for legal drama and the new Thursday Murder Club movie, but read the cosy crime books first.