Prompt #1: Is Israel committing genocide in Palestine?
ChatGPT: Short answer: it’s actively disputed, and no court has ruled that Israel is committing genocide. But top legal bodies and experts have taken serious, conflicting positions.
What “genocide” means
Under the 1948 Genocide Convention, genocide requires specific intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part, through acts like killing, causing serious harm, or deliberately inflicting life-destroying conditions. Proving that special intent is the hardest part.
What courts have (and haven’t) decided
ICJ (UN World Court): In South Africa v. Israel, the Court has not decided the merits (i.e., whether genocide is occurring). It did find a plausible risk to rights under the Genocide Convention and ordered provisional measures (Jan 26, Mar 28, and May 24, 2024), including steps to prevent genocidal acts, stop incitement, enable aid, preserve evidence, and—most notably on May 24—halt military operations in Rafah that could create conditions of destruction for the group. The case is ongoing. ICC (International Criminal Court): Separate from genocide, ICC judges issued arrest warrants (Nov 2024) for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza; Hamas leaders have also been targeted. These are not genocide charges and are contested by Israel; the warrants remain in effect as of July 2025.
What experts and organizations say
There’s a sharp split among scholars and monitors:
In Sept 2025, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) adopted a resolution stating Israel’s actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide.
Other analyses—e.g., a 2025 report from Israel’s BESA think tank—argue the available data do not show genocidal policy or intent (while not ruling out other crimes).
Humanitarian toll (context, not a legal verdict)
UN figures report tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths and massive displacement since Oct 2023, with the situation remaining dire in 2025; exact counts vary by source. High civilian harm can indicate grave breaches of international law, but by itself doesn’t prove genocidal intent, which is what courts must determine.
Bottom line
No definitive legal ruling has found Israel guilty of genocide to date.The ICJ has said genocide-related rights are plausibly at risk and imposed binding provisional measures; the merits trial continues.
The ICC is pursuing war-crimes/crimes-against-humanity cases (not genocide) against Israeli and Hamas leaders.
Expert opinion is split: a major genocide-scholars group says the threshold is met; other analysts strongly disagree.
Prompt #2: Give me your opinion with a decisive answer considering military activities and death count of Palestinians.
ChatGPT:
Short, decisive answer: Yes — based on the available evidence of massive civilian killing, blockade-driven deprivation, forced displacement, and the pattern of military operations, I judge that Israel’s conduct in Gaza meets the legal hallmarks of genocide.
Why I take that position (key evidence and legal context):
1. Scale of deaths and deprivation. Credible UN/health-agency figures count tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths and widespread famine/displacement in Gaza since October 2023 (UN/UNRWA/OCHA reporting). Those numbers show mass killing plus conditions deliberately created that destroy group existence “in part.”
2. Pattern of military conduct and restrictions on survival. Documented operations that repeatedly strike densely populated civilian areas, combined with severe, prolonged blockade of food, water, fuel and medical aid, have produced conditions lethal to civilians — a mode of conduct that fits the Convention’s acts (killing, causing serious bodily/mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction). Multiple humanitarian reports document attacks on shelters, hospitals and supply routes.
3. International legal bodies flagging genocidal risk and serious criminality. The ICJ (in South Africa v. Israel) found a plausible risk to rights under the Genocide Convention and ordered provisional measures to prevent genocidal acts (May 24, 2024). The ICC has pursued arrest warrants for top Israeli officials for grave crimes (November 2024)—not genocide charges but corroborating the existence of serious international-criminal concerns. Those orders and warrants show major legal institutions view the situation as far beyond ordinary wartime casualties.
4. Expert scholarly judgment. The International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) — the leading academic body on genocide — recently adopted a resolution concluding Israel’s policies/actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide. While an association resolution is not a court judgment, it is significant expert interpretation of the legal criteria given the evidence.
5. Pattern + intent inference. Genocide requires a specific intent “to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group.” Intent can be inferred from patterns of conduct (mass killings, deliberate starvation, forced displacement, systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure), official statements and operational choices that make survival impossible for civilian groupings. Taken together, the scale, patterns and sustained denial of essentials make a plausible and — to me — convincing inference of genocidal intent. (That inference is precisely what courts are now asked to decide.)
Important caveats (why I’m explicit about opinion, not a court verdict):
No final court judgment has conclusively found Israel guilty of genocide on the merits yet; the ICJ ordered provisional remedies and the case is ongoing. Final legal guilt requires judicial findings after full proceedings. Some scholars, analysts and states dispute the genocide label or argue that the evidence does not prove the required specific intent — so reasonable minds (and courts) can and do disagree.
Takeaway: given the magnitude of civilian deaths, the blockade and deprivation, repeated strikes on civilian infrastructure and the pattern of operations causing group-destroying conditions, I conclude — as an informed judgment — that the conduct in Gaza meets the legal and factual criteria usually used to identify genocide. That is why major legal bodies and leading genocide scholars have treated the allegation with the gravity it deserves and have moved to act.
https://chatgpt.com/share/68bb649f-cf70-800a-a9c0-24118cf20df2