“Show me the man, I’ll show you the crime,” is a principle of jurisprudence attributed to Stalin’s ruthless henchman, Lavrentiy Beria. It is now apparently adopted by a global “rights” industry: A screed issued today by Amnesty International accuses Israel of genocide. The 296-page report is a list of “predetermined conclusions.” That is the determination of the Israeli branch of Amnesty in rejecting its parent organization’s report. 

A fringe element in Israel’s left, the local Amnesty writes that even in its “analysis, put together in consultation with external experts, many of us have doubts regarding the possibility of proving unequivocally, and beyond any reasonable alternative explanation, the element of intent.” Without intent, there is no genocide — though, as Prime Minister Netanyahu once quipped, in international jurisprudence Israel is guilty before proven guilty.  

A Polish-born Jewish lawyer, Rafael Lemkin, struggled to define the horrors of the Nazi atrocities in World War II. He settled on “genocide” — Greek for killing of a people. The word he coined applied to several events in world history, apart from the Holocaust. In 1948 the United Nations adopted the convention on preventing the crime of genocide, which included a definition of the word that has been universally accepted.    

“Genocide is the intentional act of destroying, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group,” it said. “This includes killing members of the group, causing serious harm to them, or deliberately inflicting conditions that lead to their physical destruction.” Failing to prove that Israel’s actions fit that definition, Amnesty International insists that the crime is being committed anyway. It’s the convention, see, that fails to define it correctly. 

As the group writes in page 101 of the report, Amnesty considers the widely-accepted definition “an overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence.” Just find the right words, and the culprit will be nailed: Israel’s guilt, it says, can be proved if “approached holistically, that is contextually and cumulatively, taking into account the entire offensive, including acts that may not be prohibited under the Genocide Convention.” 

What a hogwash. What a disgrace. Once the definition is altered to ensure guilt, the rest is easy. The report is based on quotes from Israeli officials, many of which cite press conferences in the immediate aftermath of Hamas attack of October 7, 2023. Mr. Netanyahu’s comparison to the Biblical “Amalek” is widely cited: It is a tribe that did harm to the Israelites, and the Torah calls to erase its memory. Yet, Amnesty leaves out the rest of the premier’s words.    

The purpose of the war, Mr. Netanyahu said in his speech, is to “destroy the brutal and murderous Hamas-ISIS enemy, bring back our hostages, and restore the security to our country, our citizens and our children.” Mr. Netanyahu ordered the destruction of a group that has vowed to annihilate all Jews in Israel. Not every Arab. Is that genocide? After September 11, for one, America aimed to destroy al Qaeda — but not the entire Afghan nation. 

The United Nations lists Al Qaeda, but not Hamas, in its list of terrorists. Instead, as our Benny Avni reports, the UN yesterday mounted an exhibit on Gaza, portraying as victim several Hamas members. The exhibit cites “experts” who claim Israel is committing genocide. South Africa has taken that accusation to the International Court of Justice, citing the same partial quotes Amnesty uses. We can almost hear Lemkin roll over in his grave.