Sarit Michaeli is the International Outreach Director of the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem. Together with Physicians for Human Rights Israel, the group has, for the first time, described Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide.
B’Tselem now warns in a newly published report of a growing risk that genocidal practices could extend to the West Bank - highlighting a far-right Israeli leadership, systemic impunity, and military actions that are increasingly normalised in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The New Arab: B'Tselem’s latest report from July concludes that 'Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip'. Numerous historians, human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, and UN experts had already reached similar conclusions much earlier. Why is B'Tselem taking such a clear position only now?
Sarit Michaeli: B’Tselem has been working on the situation in Gaza for more than 21 months, and we’ve been collecting information and data for this particular report for at least a year.
It took us a long time not just to reach the conclusion, but more importantly, to figure out our role - as an Israel-based organisation with both Israeli and Palestinian staff - in the conversation around genocide. It wasn’t just about putting out a statement, but really asking: what are we contributing?
Eventually, we resolved that question by producing a report that, I think, broadens the discourse, especially on the root causes of what we call “our genocide” [i.e. Israel’s genocide], looking at the historical conditions that made it possible for the Israeli regime to become genocidal. The report also breaks new ground in warning about the risk of these genocidal practices expanding to other areas where Palestinians live under Israeli control without protection.
I would also argue that our analysis of October 7 as a trigger event - one that has shifted Israeli society and the Israeli government from a policy of domination, control, land theft, and all of the practices Israel has long carried out against Palestinians - toward a genocidal perspective, is a key contribution of the report. We wanted to be very thoughtful and coordinated, and to do it in a way that reflects a deep understanding of the situation. And that kind of work takes time.
We aim to contribute a specific perspective to the debate. Israeli Jews like me are speaking from within the society of the perpetrators, while our Palestinian staff, such as our Gaza field researchers, bring the perspective of the victims. Altogether, this gives us a unique position from which to speak about the genocide.
Palestinian testimonies are often dismissed or discredited in public discourse. We now see that the term 'genocide' is gaining more traction among journalists, largely because it is being used by Israeli NGOs like yours. Considering this, don't you think it would have been important to adopt this terminology earlier, especially given the alarming situation in Gaza over the past 22 months?
The question of privilege is certainly a real issue. In our work, we’ve always tried to challenge the idea that something is only valid when it comes from an Israeli human rights organisation. We weren’t ready to make this pronouncement when Palestinian organisations were, and I think that’s important to acknowledge.
But now we are ready - and we’re doing it in a way that, we hope, reflects the specific position we’re in. That includes both our understanding of the root causes - our ability to add to what is already known about the history and underlying structures of this genocide - and the fact that we’re speaking from within Israeli society.
I don’t think we could have done this a year ago. We needed time to study, reflect, and process what is happening, to reach our own conclusions.
Have you faced hostility or backlash following the publication of the report?
There were a couple of attacks - one came from Amichai Chikli, the Minister of Diaspora Affairs. There were also some minor attacks online. But overall, the primary response was silence. And honestly, if I were a government spokesperson, I might have done the same - because silence can prevent the conversation to expand.
Obviously, we do want the conversation to happen - inside Israel and internationally. We want our call to Israelis and to the broader public to be heard as widely as possible.
At the same time, if the government had gone after us more aggressively, it could have triggered serious consequences, like threatening phone calls or even death threats. Obviously, we don’t want to deal with such things. But it’s also true that backlash sometimes creates space for deeper public discussion within Israeli society.
Just recently, the prominent Israeli author David Grossman used the word genocide to describe what’s happening in Gaza. In response, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar condemned him and called him basically an “enemy from within”.
That tells you the government knows exactly what’s going on. They’re not unaware. The decision not to go after B’Tselem - or to respond only minimally - was clearly a deliberate one. That could change, of course - we’ll see what happens in the coming weeks.
Your report states that B'Tselem’s field researchers in Gaza managed to escape with their families after months of displacement and danger. Were all of them able to leave, or are some still in Gaza? Can you share more about their current situation?
We had three field researchers who were evacuated last year with their families. They are in Cairo now. From there, they continue their work: reaching out to victims and witnesses of the genocide in Gaza, primarily through WhatsApp, which has become the main form of communication for many people there.
This, of course, adds significant challenges. But it also means they survived, which, tragically, cannot be said for many of their relatives and communities. All of them left dozens of family members behind in Gaza, including close relatives. Each of them lost loved ones.
I honestly don’t know whether they’ll ever be able to return to Gaza. That’s just the current reality. Still, they continue to do invaluable work from a place of relative safety. And because of their deep experience on the ground before their evacuation, I trust fully in their ability to continue conveying the realities of Gaza.
You mention in your report that testimonies were collected from hundreds of residents from Gaza. Could you elaborate on what people have reported specifically regarding the conditions of hunger and the man-made famine?
We have a section on our website called Voices from Gaza, where we’ve been consistently publishing these accounts - especially since the beginning of what we identify as the genocide. These are firsthand testimonies from people living through this catastrophe. We’ve also been documenting the use of starvation as a method of warfare by Israel. And yes, again and again, we’re hearing testimonies that confirm this reality.
One example really struck us: an old colleague of mine - someone who briefly worked as a field researcher for us in Gaza years ago - recently told us that he bought a one-kilogram bag of flour for $90.
He told us that he and his children had eaten only one piece of bread with a bit of seasoning. He explained they’re so hungry that it’s even hard for them to walk, because they’re just lacking any kind of energy.
To what extent do you see the genocide extending beyond Gaza - to the West Bank and East Jerusalem?
In the report, we warn about the risk of a similar situation occurring as after October 7 - a triggering event that unleashed genocidal violence. From our perspective, we haven’t seen any change in Israeli tactics, practices, or modus operandi. The underlying conditions that enabled the genocide in Gaza - this long history we outline in the report - have not changed. The same political leadership, the same military commanders, the same policies are still in place.
We fear that the same genocidal practices could be extended to the West Bank. Soldiers and officers have grown accustomed to the practices that became normalised in Gaza, and now they’re operating in the West Bank. There’s still no accountability, no meaningful protection for Palestinians. The same ideas, the same actions, the same decision-makers, and the same military are still in place. Nothing on the ground has fundamentally changed.
You argue that Israeli institutions - including the legal system - have played a role in legitimising policies that amount to mass violence against Palestinians. Can you explain how this institutional complicity functions, particularly in relation to your designation of Israel as an apartheid state?
The Israeli legal system has never truly protected Palestinians. This is a well-documented issue - I'm not just talking about the current moment, but about decades of history. Yes, there have been a few exceptional, limited cases where the system intervened in a minor way, but overall, it has consistently failed to uphold Palestinian rights.
B’Tselem and others have shown, for example, how the legal system facilitates the demolition of Palestinian homes. We’ve published reports showing how the courts effectively serve to legitimize Israeli policies. Israel has long drawn international legitimacy from the appearance of having a functioning democratic legal system - though that perception is now eroding.
In practice, the system has provided almost no protection for Palestinians. Whether in seeking compensation for harm by soldiers, in the face of settler violence, or in broader structural violence, the legal system has consistently sided with the authorities and reinforces Israeli occupation. It functions more to validate state violence than to protect the victims of that policy.
You call for urgent action using every means available under international law. What concrete measures would you like to see from governments, institutions, or civil society actors?
We deliberately didn’t provide a detailed list on concrete measures, for two main reasons. First, we don’t believe governments around the world need a laundry list from B’Tselem to know what to do. The issue is not a lack of ideas or policy options.
The problem is a lack of political will [to end supporting the Israeli government], or in some cases, even an active greenlighting, as we’ve seen under the Trump administration and previously under the Biden administration.
Second, there are risks we have to consider - like the safety of our staff, our ability to keep operating, and other concerns. What matters to us is that any international action should be judged by one simple question: will it help stop the genocide?
That also applies to our call to Israeli society - we urge people to do whatever is within their power under international law to help bring the genocide to an end.
Elias Feroz studied Islamic religion and history as part of his teacher training programme at the University of Innsbruck in Austria. Elias also works as a freelance writer and focuses on a variety of topics, including racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the politics of history, and the culture of remembrance
Follow him on X: @FerozElias