The headquarters of The New York Times. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

On and after Oct. 7, 2023, Israel’s prime minister and then-foreign minister made clear their plans for Hamas, the group responsible for the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

On the day of the massacre, as Hamas attackers swarmed Israeli towns, Netanyahu spoke of the country’s straightforward goals: to repel the attack, defeat Hamas in Gaza, and deter other fronts. Per Haaretz:

Speaking at the beginning of the security cabinet meeting later on Saturday, Netanyahu said that “Our first goal is to purge the area of enemy forces that have infiltrated and restore security and peace to the towns that were attacked.”

The second goal according to Netanyahu, is to “exact a huge price from the enemy, also in the Gaza Strip. The third goal is to fortify other arenas so that no one makes the mistake of joining this war. [emphasis added]

In a separate statement that same day, Netanyahu said:

The IDF will immediately use all its strength to destroy Hamas’s capabilities. We will destroy them and we will forcefully avenge this dark day that they have forced on the State of Israel and its citizens. As Bialik wrote: ‘Revenge for the blood of a little child has yet been devised by Satan’.

All of the places which Hamas is deployed, hiding and operating in, that wicked city, we will turn them into rubble.

I say to the residents of Gaza: Leave now because we will operate forcefully everywhere.

At this hour, the IDF is clearing the terrorists out of the last communities. They are going community by community, house by house, and are restoring our control.

I embrace and send heartfelt condolences to the bereaved families whose loved ones were murdered today in cold blood and endless brutality. [emphasis added]

Two days after the attack, defense minister Yoav Gallant said of Hamas, “We are fighting human animals.” It was a phrase he also used elsewhere to refer to the terror group that he dubbed the ISIS of Gaza.

Three weeks later, as Israel began its ground offensive in Gaza, Netanyahu explained that Israel’s army “does everything to avoid harming non-combatants” and stated that the goals of the war are clear: “Destroying Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, and bringing the captives back home.”

In that speech, he also recited a verse from Deuteronomy. “Remember what Amalek did to you,” he said several sentences after speaking about protecting non-combatants in Gaza. It is a passage that Jewish tradition and Holocaust memorials have long used as a call to remember the oppressors of the Jewish people, including the Nazis, which some consider the spiritual heirs of Amalek.

None of these quotes are particularly surprising or, given the context, notable. Hamas slaughtered Israeli civilians in one of the worst terror attacks in modern memory. Israel said that in response it would destroy the group, and its leaders had harsh words for the group behind the massacre.

And yet so many anti-Israel commentators have absurdly cited those very statements as purported evidence of “genocide.”

A New York Times Guest Essay this week by Omer Bartov is just the latest example. Bartov points to the passages cited above as his leading examples to purport “genocidal intent” by Israel’s leaders.

This is because intent — not simply death resulting from war — is key to the legal definition of “genocide,” as Bartov must acknowledge in his piece:

The crime of genocide was defined in 1948 by the United Nations as the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.” In determining what constitutes genocide, therefore, we must both establish intent and show that it is being carried out.

He then claims — as if he hadn’t just cited unremarkable martial language by Israel’s decision makers — that “In Israel’s case, that intent has been publicly expressed by numerous officials and leaders.”

Some lower-ranking Israeli politicians have gone farther. After misconstruing Netanyahu and Gallant’s words, the author points to vitriolic statements by Israel’s finance minister and deputy speaker of Parliament. Both are hardliners far to the right of those with practical authority over the direction of the war — the prime minister and defense minister. But clearly Bartov recognizes that the words by lower-ranking officials, however over-the-top, weren’t enough to make his case. So he invents genocidal rhetoric to manufacture genocidal intent.

Bartov recruits others in support of his allegation. These include Francesca Albanese, the extremist rapporteur and rape denier who herself has relied on misquoted and misrepresented statements by Israeli officials to justify her allegation, and Amnesty International, whose charge of genocide hinges on an assembly line of distorted quotes.

And at the same time, Bartov laments that “only a few scholars of the Holocaust” have echoed his allegation, and that “Most Holocaust scholars I know don’t hold, or at least publicly express” the view that the war is a genocide. (Somewhat puzzlingly, Bartov insists that it isn’t even a war because it is — by contrast? — a series of battles against a group that “continues to fight Israeli forces” while “retaining control” over territory not held by Israel.)

If most scholars don’t agree with Bartov and fellow anti-Israel activists who seem to dominate the discussion, perhaps it is because they recognize that Israel’s calls to destroy Hamas and angry descriptions of the terror group are hardly evidence of genocidal intent — even if The New York Times has chosen to join the campaign to misrepresent those statements.

Gilead Ini is a Senior Research Analyst at CAMERA, the foremost media watchdog organization focused on coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict.