Exclusive: “Every Day Is a Fight for Survival in Gaza” says Genocide Scholar Dr. Melanie O’Brien

In an exclusive interview, Dr. Melanie O’Brien, President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), provides critical insights into the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the complex legal framework surrounding genocide prevention.

Dr. O’Brien emphasises that understanding genocide requires a comprehensive historical perspective. “In genocide studies, we call genocide a process, not an event, and that’s why we look beyond today, beyond yesterday, going back several years to see what has happened in terms of human rights abuses, and particularly persecution and discrimination of a particular targeted group,” she explains.

The legal definition of genocide centers on specific intent, which Dr. O’Brien notes creates significant challenges in prosecution. “Genocide is defined as the destruction in whole or in part of a group… carried out through one of five different crimes including killing and causing serious bodily or mental harm,” she states. “The intent to destroy a particular group is what makes genocide different and also quite difficult to prove in a court of law because you have to be able to prove that the perpetrators intended to destroy that people.”

Regarding the current situation in Gaza, Dr. O’Brien points to several concerning patterns. “We are seeing indiscriminate bombing, long-term indiscriminate bombing that is killing people, that is destroying livelihoods, that is destroying infrastructure, that is destroying healthcare facilities and healthcare workers,” she observes. She particularly highlights the strategic use of humanitarian aid as a weapon: “Denial of humanitarian aid, including food, healthcare, and medicine, is leading to a high likelihood of death. Therefore, you have to say their intent must be to kill, to destroy, at least in part, the Palestinian people of Gaza.”

Dr. O’Brien also discusses the psychological warfare tactics employed, noting that “Israeli military open firing on people queuing for food, resulting in deaths, is designed to create fear so that people don’t even want to try and get food, because that is just another situation where they risk death.”

The scholar acknowledges the historical context whilst maintaining legal clarity: “The genocide convention came about in part as a result of the Holocaust… The Jewish people have an existential fear that someone will destroy their people because it happened to them.” However, she firmly states that “even if Israel had a right to self-defense against an armed attack from Hamas, there is certainly no justification for the commission of genocide.”
Dr. O’Brien criticises the international community’s response, particularly highlighting how “the Security Council system, with the veto power of the permanent five members including the United States, essentially prevents any action from being taken regarding this situation.” She notes that while “there are arrest warrants that the International Criminal Court has issued against Benjamin Netanyahu and the former defense minister of Israel Yav Galant, waiting for implementation,” meaningful enforcement remains elusive.

The human cost remains paramount in Dr. O’Brien’s analysis: “On the ground in Gaza, every individual is hoping they survive each day, not knowing where their food will come from or whether they will be bombed or shot at.”