According to statements from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, notable concerns have been raised about possible violations of international humanitarian law in the Gaza Strip. The OHCHR spokesperson highlighted accusations that could amount to war crimes, pointing to acts such as forced population transfers, attacks targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure, and the collective punishment of Gazan residents. These assessments are presented as serious claims that require careful consideration and independent verification by competent judicial authorities (OHCHR).
The spokesperson stressed that any evaluation of Israel’s conduct in Gaza should be conducted by a court equipped to examine the facts impartially and to determine whether actions meet the legal thresholds for crimes under international law, including potential genocide. This approach reflects the principle that serious allegations demand a rigorous, transparent legal process to establish accountability while safeguarding the rights of all affected populations (OHCHR).
On 7 October, dynamics escalated sharply as Hamas forces launched a substantial rocket campaign into Israeli territory and initiated Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. Thousands of militants reportedly crossed into areas under Israeli control, seizing equipment and taking a large number of hostages. In response, Israeli leadership announced that the country was at war, triggering a broad set of military and security measures aimed at preventing further attacks and restoring state control (government sources, as reported by international observers).
The Israeli defense establishment launched an operation described as Iron Swords, with stated objectives focused on degrading the capabilities of Hamas within Gaza. The air force conducted extensive bombardments against numerous targets linked to Hamas, while the National Security Council considered strategic options including restricting the flow of essential supplies such as water, food, fuel, and electricity to the Gaza Strip. These steps were framed as necessary to interrupt militant operations and compel a change in behavior, though they raised concerns about civilian impact and the humanitarian situation in Gaza (military and governmental communications, monitored by international observers).
As the conflict progressed, international organizations noted heightened humanitarian alarm. The United Nations warned that a significant portion of the population in Gaza might need to relocate to safer areas as a precaution against potential ground operations. The call for movement was presented as a protective measure in light of evolving military plans, but it also underscored the immense challenges faced by civilians trying to access basic services and shelter amid ongoing hostilities (UN briefings and expert analyses).
Reports from aid organizations and UN agencies indicated that vital facilities and services in the Gaza Strip had sustained damage since the onset of the tension. The destruction of or impairment to installations supporting humanitarian relief, health care, education, and other essential services complicated relief work and heightened the risk to civilians. Observers emphasized the importance of safeguarding civilian infrastructure and ensuring that aid corridors remain open to prevent a deterioration of living conditions in a densely populated area (UN agencies and relief organizations).