‘Gaza – Yes it is genocide, and yes, it really matters’. That was the title of a seminar held in Archway 1 at midday last Wednesday, hosted by Professors Robert Patman and Richard Jackson, and Dr Rula Talahma. Each spoke to their personal expertise and experiences to unpick the prickly question: is Israel committing genocide in Gaza? The scholars’ evidence-based conclusion: yes, and New Zealand and the University of Otago should be doing their “utmost” to stop it.
“Genocide” has been a controversial word when it’s come to Israel’s actions in Gaza. Critic Te Ārohi had to tread carefully when reporting on the topic in March last year, only including it inside quotation marks as the opinion of others. However, the word has been increasingly used as fact, not opinion. South Africa presented a case to the International Court of Justice alleging that Israel was committing genocide early last year, and the human rights organisation Amnesty International released an investigative report reaching the same conclusion just last month.
The seminar’s poster announced that the three speakers would “examine the question of whether the violence in Gaza should be considered under the rubric of Genocide: does it meet the threshold for the legal concept of Genocide? What do the experts say? Does it meet the criteria for the academic concept of Genocide? This will be followed by a discussion of why the plight of Palestinians in Gaza matters for Aotearoa New Zealand, its sense of national identity, and its international reputation in relation to issues like supporting human rights and a rules-based international order.”
Co-Director for the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies Richard Jackson was first up. In ten minutes he sped-run an explainer of the legal definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention, of which there’s a “growing consensus” around the globe that Israel’s actions match: killing members of a certain group (46,707 Palesintians have been killed and more explosives used than in WW2), causing serious bodily or mental harm (over 100,000 people have been injured, life-saving supplies denied, and evidence of torture), and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction (deliberate actions to cause mass starvation and spread of disease).
Richard pointed to evidence including UN reports, victim testimonials, first-hand eye-witness accounts, discussion papers from genocide scholars and experts. All consistent with the manner of evidence that has been used to define other known genocides, he pointed out – both legally and academically, with the erasure and elimination of Palestinian culture. “The threshold for a case genocide has been met,” he said. Further on, he elaborated, “In fact, it can be reasonably argued that the genocide in Gaza is likely the most well-documented and well-established genocide in history to date.”
Dr Rula Talahma, who completed her PhD at Otago’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, then took the mic. Rula is Palestinian and wore a keffiyeh; she spoke with emotion about her experience having watched the genocide from afar as friends and family members have suffered. She began with the whakatauki, “Hūtia te rito te harakeke, kei hea te kōmako e kō? If the heart is torn from the flax bush, where then will the bellbird sing?”
The genocide’s devastating impacts on the new generation of Palestinians – where “children are raising children” and the death toll means it would take 30 years to mourn every child killed – is removing the heart of the flax bush, Palestine. For Rula, to deny that what is happening is genocide “speaks racism” and has “exposed the hypocrisy of human rights and broken moral [compass].” “Palestinians are told they have not died enough or suffered enough,” she said.
Next to the stage was Professor Robert Patman, who was introduced with his impressive list of credentials including being national media’s go-to man for international relations expertise. He detailed his expert opinion on the international political climate and New Zealand’s “softly, softly” approach has been “ambiguous and failed to show moral and legal clarity” where war crimes have been consistently committed. In his opinion, New Zealand could be a leader in support of Palestine, “whose lives have been systematically trampled on.”
During questions at the end, the three speakers agreed: “You can’t look at the evidence without coming to the conclusion that it is a genocide.” Genocide is unjustifiable on any grounds, and therefore states and scholars have an obligation and responsibility to do their “utmost” to prevent it – and they “don’t see what we’re doing at this university”.
A University of Otago spokesperson told Critic Te Ārohi in response to the speakers’ comments, “The University does not have an official position on the situation in Gaza. We have a long-standing position of institutional neutrality on geo-political issues that do not directly impact on the University.” The Otago Staff for Palestine group have sent a BDS proposal to the University which is “waiting for a working group considering the issue of institutional neutrality to report back to the University before any further discussion takes place at senate."