Israel-Gaza Conflict: A Myth-Busting Q&A
This article is correct to the best of the author’s research and knowledge at the time of publication.
The Israel-Gaza conflict is one of the most misrepresented and emotionally charged topics in modern geopolitics. Misinformation spreads fast, often drowning out nuance and fact. This Q&A addresses some of the most common myths and claims using clear, evidence-based responses.
Q1: Is Gaza under Israeli occupation?
A: No. Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in 2005, removing all settlers and military presence. Since 2007, Gaza has been governed by Hamas, an internationally recognised terrorist organisation. While Israel controls its own border with Gaza, so does Egypt. The restrictions are not occupation; they are border controls, often tightened due to Hamas aggression.
Q2: Isn’t Israel committing genocide?
A: Genocide has a strict legal definition: the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The ICJ has not concluded that genocide is taking place. Provisional rulings are procedural and not verdicts. Civilian casualties, though tragic, do not by themselves meet the threshold for genocide.
Q3: Weren’t Jews just European colonisers?
A: No. Jews are indigenous to the land historically known as Judea. They maintained a continuous presence in the region for over 3,000 years. Modern Zionism emerged as a response to centuries of persecution and pogroms. The comparison with European colonialism ignores this deep ancestral connection.
Q4: Didn’t Israel start the conflict by taking Palestinian land?
A: The modern state of Israel was established in 1948 after a UN Partition Plan proposed two states. Jewish leaders accepted it; Arab leaders rejected it and launched a war. The current statelessness of Palestinians stems in part from repeated Arab refusals of two-state proposals.
Q5: What about the West Bank and settlements?
A: The West Bank is disputed territory. Its status was left unresolved after the 1948 and 1967 wars. Settlements are controversial and should be subject to negotiation. However, the existence of settlements does not justify terrorism or Hamas’s charter calling for Israel’s destruction.
Q6: Are all reports from Gaza trustworthy?
A: Not automatically. While some are credible, many are unverifiable or come from Hamas-controlled sources. Footage needs independent verification. Social media is not a court of law.
Q7: Why do some accuse Israel of apartheid?
A: The term is politically charged and misapplied. Arab citizens of Israel enjoy full rights, including voting, representation, and access to the judiciary. Security measures in the West Bank exist because of a history of terrorism, not because of race.
Q8: Is “From the river to the sea” just a call for freedom?
A: No. The phrase historically refers to the elimination of Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. It’s a call for erasure, not coexistence.
Q9: Aren’t Palestinians the only Semites in this conflict?
A: False. Jews are Semites too. Accusing Israelis of being “antisemitic” for defending themselves is a distortion of language and history.
Q10: Was October 7 just an isolated attack on a music festival?
A: No. It was a full-scale, premeditated invasion involving mass murder, torture, rape, and hostage-taking. Thousands of Hamas operatives crossed the border to carry out widespread atrocities.
Closing Thought:
Criticising Israel is not antisemitic. But repeating propaganda, denying Israeli victimhood, or calling for its destruction is. Peace requires honesty, not slogans.
If you found this useful, feel free to share or point others here instead of re-explaining it all again.
