Britain’s Chief Rabbi: Calling Gaza Genocide Trivializes The Word
Sir Ephraim Mirvis, the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, has spoken out against describing Israel’s military campaign in Gaza as “genocide,” saying the charge cheapens the word and transforms what he called “humanity’s gravest crime” into a tool of political rhetoric.
Writing in The Telegraph, Sir Ephraim Mirvis argued that the allegation is now deployed with alarming ease. As he put it: “Today it takes almost no thought to repeat the accusation that Israel has committed ‘genocide’.”
He noted that the accusation comes from different quarters and motivations. “Some repeat it from a place of singular hostility toward the world’s only Jewish state; others from an earnest desire to hasten an end to an unquestionably horrific conflict in which many innocent people have suffered. But whatever the motivation, the result is the same: this gravest of crimes is invoked casually, without due regard for the weight of the word itself.”
Mirvis went on to describe a public climate driven by exaggeration and online outrage. “In an age when hyperbole dominates our discourse and outrage is rewarded with clicks, campaigners reach instinctively for the most extreme language available. Faced with images on social media of immense, tragic suffering in Gaza, journalists, academics and celebrities understandably feel compelled to speak out.”
He cautioned that this escalation in language carries serious risks. “Yet the race to linguistic escalation has consequences. The ubiquity of a term is often wrongly understood as evidence of its veracity. And some terms have a meaning that must remain protected at all costs. ‘Genocide’ is one of them.”
Pointing to the legal standard for genocide, Mirvis stressed that the crime requires intent to destroy a people, in whole or in part. He explained: “It is why Britain and her allies are not accused of genocide for our strategic bombing of Nazi Germany, despite the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians who were killed. Intent is the moral and legal hinge. The clearest evidence that Israel did not intend to destroy the people of Gaza is that it did not in fact do so.”
He characterized the war as one “Israel did not seek, nor start,” and said Israel’s aims have centered on freeing hostages and neutralizing Hamas, which he described as a group committed to Israel’s annihilation. He added: “If Hamas lays down its arms, there will be no fighting and no suffering. If Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel.”
The Chief Rabbi also took aim at certain human rights groups, saying they “appear to revel in misappropriating the term genocide” by stretching its definition and engaging in what he called “a truly troubling moral deceit.”
While acknowledging the dire humanitarian toll in Gaza, Mirvis said: “The tragic suffering of Palestinians abounds” and insisted that “no decent person could fail to be moved by it or wish to see its end”. At the same time, he maintained that there is no proof of “systematic massacres, mass executions, or the targeted killing of civilians as a matter of policy”.
He warned that careless use of the term ultimately corrodes its meaning. “When academics, activists, faith leaders and public figures declare, with unshakeable certainty, that genocide has occurred, they do something far more destructive than merely repeat a falsehood. They trivialise the very concept they claim to defend. What language is left for the Rohingya, expelled en masse, systematically raped and slaughtered? For the Uyghurs, subjected to mass internment, forced sterilisation and cultural erasure? For the ethnically targeted killing and mass rape in West Darfur? To invoke the term ‘genocide’ as an accusation against Israel is to strip it of its true meaning, reducing humanity’s gravest crime to a political insult.”
In closing, Mirvis called for compassion alongside moral clarity. “The suffering of innocent people demands empathy, accountability and a genuine commitment to preventing future conflict. But to level the charge of genocide against Israel is to commit a moral inversion whose casualties include not only Israelis and Palestinians, but the very idea of human rights itself.”
{Matzav.com}
