Hub Podcasts The dangerous dilution of genocide
4 snips
Oct 10, 2025 Alan H. Kessel and Casey Babb, experts in international law and accountability, discuss the perilous dilution of the term 'genocide.' They argue that legal definitions must be rooted in intent, critiquing the Pili Commission for its lack of evidence. The pair highlight Israel's defensive operations post-October 7 attacks, cautioning against mislabeling actions. They express concern over the politicization of the Genocide Convention and advocate for accountability through Israeli courts rather than politicized international processes.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Genocide Requires Specific Intent
- Genocide is a legally precise crime requiring proof of specific intent to destroy a group, not just mass civilian deaths.
- Using casualty counts and incendiary rhetoric alone risks redefining genocide into a political label rather than a legal finding.
Report Assumes Intent Without Operational Evidence
- The Pili Commission counted casualties and assumed intent without showing an operational plan to destroy Palestinians.
- Equating defensive military responses to genocide sets a precedent that could criminalize future Western defensive actions.
Defer To Robust Domestic Courts
- Recognize and rely on Israel's domestic courts as a primary accountability mechanism when they are willing and able to investigate.
- Avoid defaulting to international intervention when national judicial systems demonstrate independence and capacity.