Palestinians gather around the head of an Israeli missile that landed near their homes in a residential area of Gaza City. (Wissam Nassar, Maan Images)

During a visit to Ramallah a year ago while the Israeli bombardment of Gaza was underway, I shared my fears with a close Palestinian friend. "It may sound insane, but I think the Israelis' real objective is to see them all dead."

My friend told me not to be silly, the assault was horrific, but it was not mass killing. I said that wasn't the issue: This was a population already very vulnerable to disease, ill-health, and malnutrition after years of siege, with its infrastructure rotted, its water and food contaminated. Israel's war would surely push the people over the brink, especially if the siege was maintained - as it has been.

In other words, Israel would not directly kill tens of thousands of Palestinians, but it would create the conditions for tens of thousands to die. Any epidemic could finish the job. My friend fell silent at these words, but still shook his head in disbelief.

Two things have changed since last year: More people have started to apply the term "genocide" to what Israel is doing to Gaza. And not only is Israel being directly accused but also, increasingly, Egypt.

Is it genocide? "The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" - a clear, concise document adopted by the United Nations in December 1948 - states that genocide is any of five acts committed "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Three acts appear to apply to the situation in Gaza: "(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part."

	Related Stories
	Jerusalem should be at the center of peace efforts Targeting human rights defenders

Legal scholars disagree about how to interpret the Convention's articles and it has proven difficult, over the years, to define crimes as genocide, let alone to prevent or end them. In line with the Bosnia precedent - the only authoritative legal treatment of genocide to date - it would be necessary to establish deliberate intent for an accusation of genocide against Israel to stand up in court.

Israel's leadership has not, of course, issued a declaration of intent. However, many leading Israeli officials can be said to have done so. For example:

1. Putting the Palestinians of Gaza "on a diet" - Dov Weisglass, chief aide to Ariel Sharon, in 2006.

2. Exposing them to "a bigger shoah (holocaust)" - Matan Vilnai, former deputy defense minister, in 2008.

3. Issuing religious edits exhorting soldiers to show no mercy - the Israeli army rabbinate during the actual conflict.

To read the full article please visit Agence Global.