The dam of Gaza genocide denial has broken
JVL Introduction
A hard-hitting analysis by genocide scholar Martin Shaw of how politicians and the media long denied there was a genocide in Gaza.
Times are changing but those media which now call out genocide generally do so with a shrug of the shoulders, “as though,” says Shaw, “they are saying, “Yes, it’s a genocide, but what can we do about it?”
In reality, he argues, they are effectively still in denial, failing to report on how Israel’s policies are enabled by wider Western support and therefore unable to explore ways in which it might be halted.
RK
This article was originally published by New Lines Magazine on Mon 21 Jul 2025. Read the original here.
The dam of Gaza genocide denial has broken
Several prominent media outlets are coming off the fence over Israel’s actions, but a conspiracy of helplessness still prevails
Loading article text…
I have Stanley Cohen’s book, which indeed has the third kind of denial as “implicatory” denial, as does Martin Shaw’s original article. Stanley Cohen’s voice is so needed at this time of the lethal denial that has allowed this unconscionable slaughter to go on and on, and which we are still seeing and hearing from our government as they continue holding Israel as our ally, no matter what.
Amongst the many things we could do to show our utter horror at what Israel is doing (Genocide upon the Palestinian nation): we could stop treating them as if they are European, thus welcome to compete in European events like the song contest and European sporting events, stop treating those who oppose genocide like criminals, when they/we take exception to Israeli crimes against humanity.
Stan Cohen’s book is wonderful and I remember his kindness when I was very young and confused; also remember my young IS friends’ respect for Martin Shaw and have followed his trajectory.
I forwarded Albanese’s report to Starmer , my MP (who’s stopped replying to any of my letters since as I began mentioning Israel around 2017). He has now written back, like Lammy asserting his belated horror at what Israel is doing but omitting to mention any of the substantive list of UK companies enabling the genocide. I also sent Albanese’s list to my local Camden councillors who so far have delayed and obfuscated – then suppressed – discussion about divestment . They have not replied at all.
One point that is often omitted even from the important article above, is that the Genocide Convention itself imposes very clear immediate obligations. These override all other considerations, alliances, politics, loyalties. Once a genocide is declared everything has to stop and all governments have to prevent it. This is not a ‘What can we do about it?’ situation. By making the obligation optional, people in power are devaluing the term so completely that they are ensuring it continues to happen again and again.
It’s hard to understand why the accusation of genocide was so easily denied when the people perpetrating it were so clear and honest about their intention to achieve it. Time after time we heard from Israeli cabinet members, not some loudmouth in the marketplace, that no Gazans could be considered as not responsible for the October 7th attack; they had voted for Hamas, hadn’t they, in 2006, so they were clearly all to blame and could have no complaint about the punishment that was now being exacted? We heard that the Hebrew Bible urged genocide with respect to the Amalek (a word this godless atheist had never seen before) and other enemies, so the current effort was consistent with previous religious teaching.
True, the BBC and others insisted that the war was between Israel and Hamas, but we knew that this was not true; Hamas never had as many fighters as the death figures required and none at all under the age of ten, so that ruled out thousands. We understood that the word “Hamas” itself was all you needed to attach to any section of the population to give instant approval to any act executed on that group.
There was speculation as to how many non-Hamas people could justifiably be killed to eliminate a single fighter: 40, 50, a hundred? So, the inference there was that these others who carried the guilt of proximity could have no right to be spared the wrath of the avengers.
And finally we had the wording of the Genocide Convention itself – but who was bothered about that? Certainly not the supporters of Zionism, a doctrine that has genocide built in to its foundations.
We have to acknowledge truth, all else is to be complicit in Genocide. Not in my name