Fair question. I personally wouldn't call it genocide, I think that is a very loaded word, that should be used extremely carefully because of its historical context.
I put "not necessarily" in there for the last part of the post. I find it nearly impossible for a person to rationally determine that Israel hasn't committed either Crimes Against Humanity (Article 7) or War Crimes (Article 8) as defined by the Rome Statute. The only way Israel escapes warrants against Netanyahu and his generals is if the ICC caves to US threats.
Importantly, Hamas is also guilty of Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes, and Crimes of Aggression (Article 9).
Thanks for your explanation/clarification.
I’m sure your assessment is accurate. My question in response would be - when faced with an aggressor, how does a country win a war against them without committing what are now considered war crimes. In the last war that the US won we and our allies committed what would surely be considered war crimes against our enemies to limit our losses and hasten our enemy’s surrender. Wouldn’t following codes now in place made WWII much more costly in both blood and treasure?