Amnesty International’s new report accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza has drawn sharp criticism for its alleged lack of thorough research and perceived political bias.

Legal scholar Orde Kittrie disputes the report’s findings, arguing that Israeli actions don’t meet the definition of genocide. He emphasizes that proving genocide requires demonstrating intentional killing of civilians solely because of their Palestinian identity, not as collateral damage during self-defense against Hamas.

Kittrie highlights Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties, emphasizing that these actions contradict the notion of genocidal intent. He asserts that Israel’s actions are aimed at freeing hostages, apprehending perpetrators of the October 7th attacks, and protecting its citizens.

Israel’s UN Ambassador, Danny Danon, strongly condemned the report, asserting that Hamas, supported by Iran, demonstrated genocidal intent through documented acts of violence during the October 7th attacks. He stated that Israel’s actions are solely in response to Hamas’ aggression and are focused on bringing back hostages held captive.

The report, titled “‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza,” concludes that Israel has committed and continues to commit genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

David Adesnik of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies views Amnesty International’s use of the term “genocide” as biased, highlighting the organization’s failure to apply the term to comparable atrocities in Sudan, Ukraine, and Xinjiang. This selective application, he argues, reveals a double standard.

Adesnik points out the report’s minimal mention of Hamas’s abuse of civilian structures, contrasting it with Amnesty International’s previous admonishments to Ukrainian forces regarding similar actions. He also criticizes the report’s omission of significant humanitarian aid provided to Gaza.

Amnesty International’s report alleges that Israel obstructed the delivery of essential supplies to Gaza. However, Adesnik counters this claim by citing the substantial amount of aid delivered. He deems the report’s treatment of this aspect unbalanced.

The report cites 22 statements by Israeli officials supposedly calling for or justifying genocidal acts.

Salo Aizenberg of HonestReporting refutes these claims, asserting that they misrepresent and selectively quote Israeli leaders. He cites the International Court of Justice’s case against Israel as an example of misrepresentation, referencing Israeli President Herzog’s criticism of the court’s use of his words.

Amnesty International did not respond to questions regarding Hamas leaders’ calls for indiscriminate attacks, their use of civilian structures, and whether they consider conflicts in Sudan, Ukraine, Xinjiang, and Afghanistan to constitute genocide.

Further evidence of bias against Israel is seen in Amnesty International Northern Ireland’s invitation of Francesca Albanese, a UN special rapporteur, known for antisemitic statements, to speak on Israeli genocide.

Albanese’s Dec. 3 speech highlights the rise of anti-Israel sentiment and its potential impact on Jewish communities worldwide following the October 7th attacks. Even in countries with small Jewish populations like Ireland, the increased antisemitism is cause for concern.