DEBUNKED: The Guardian claims 83% civilian death in Gaza

Today, the Guardian published an article claiming that a classified Israeli military intelligence database reveals an alarming 83% civilian death rate in the Gaza war, painting Israel as responsible for an unprecedented slaughter of civilians while implying Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) are minor players in the conflict.

The article, a joint investigation with +972 Magazine and Local Call, cites 8,900 named fighters killed out of a total 53,000 deaths reported by Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry, framing Israel’s actions as potentially genocidal.

But a closer examination of the data, sources, and context reveals significant flaws and biases that inflate the civilian toll, downplay Hamas’ role, and cast Israel as the villain in a complex conflict.

This analysis debunks these claims, exposing how selective reporting and questionable data manipulation create a skewed narrative that portrays Hamas as victims and Israel as the aggressor.

The 83% Civilian Death Rate: Inflated Numbers and Flawed Assumptions

The Guardian'’s headline claim, that 83% of Palestinians killed in Gaza were civilians, hinges on two figures: 8,900 named Hamas and PIJ fighters from an Israeli database and 53,000 total deaths from the Gaza Health Ministry (GHM) as of May 2025. This calculation (8,900 ÷ 53,000 = ~17% fighters, thus 83% civilians) assumes both datasets are accurate and compatible, but both are riddled with issues that inflate the civilian toll and minimize Hamas’ losses.

The GHM, controlled by Hamas since 2007, has a history of unreliable reporting (and that's putting it kindly). A 2024 Henry Jackson Society report documented errors in GHM data, including misreported ages (e.g., a 22-year-old listed as a 4-year-old), inclusion of pre-war deaths, and deaths from Hamas’ misfired rockets. Natural deaths, such as ~5,000 annual cancer fatalities, may also be counted, inflating the toll. A Washington Institute study noted that since November 2023, the GHM has relied heavily on unverified media reports, further eroding credibility. For example, the GHM reported 1,192 men killed in northern and central Gaza by March 18, 2024, but inexplicably reduced this to 1,170 five days later, a statistical impossibility unless “22 men came back to life.”

Conversely, the Israeli database’s 8,900 fighter deaths likely undercounts Hamas and PIJ losses. Based on seized documents, it only includes “named” fighters, missing undocumented recruits or deaths. The Jerusalem Post reported in January 2025 that the IDF revised Hamas’ fighter count from 25,000 to 40,000, suggesting significant recruitment during the war. If true, the 8,900 figure could represent less than half of actual Hamas deaths. Israeli estimates of 17,000–20,000 fighters killed, though unverified, align with a Haaretz report citing commanders who doubted inflated terrorist count but confirmed higher fighter casualties than the Guardian suggests.

Independent studies offer a more nuanced picture. A 2024 OHCHR analysis found 70% of those killed in residential buildings were women and children, and scholars estimated 80% civilian deaths overall, close to but not confirming the Guardian’s 83%. A Lancet study estimated 64,260 deaths by June 2024, with 59.1% being women, children, and elderly.

Selective Context: Downplaying Hamas’s Role

The Guardian minimizes Hamas’s tactics, which significantly contribute to civilian casualties. Hamas’s practice of embedding fighters in densely populated areas, using hospitals and schools as bases, and employing human shields is well-documented. A 2023 BBC report confirmed Hamas’s use of civilian infrastructure, complicating IDF targeting and increasing civilian risk. The article acknowledges Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack, but calls it a trigger rather than a strategic escalation by a group committed to Israel’s destruction. By contrast, Israel’s response, including evacuation warnings and safe zones is dismissed as reckless, ignoring the urban warfare challenges posed by Hamas’ tactics.

The Guardian also overlooks Hamas’ manipulation of casualty data. A Washington Institute analysis noted that media-based GHM reports are unlikely to capture combatant deaths accurately due to access restrictions and fear of retribution for exposing Hamas losses. This selective reporting inflates civilian numbers, casting Hamas as a beleaguered resistance rather than an active belligerent. The article’s reliance on +972 Magazine and Local Call, outlets known for anti-Israel stances, further tilts the narrative.

Genocide Allegations: A Charged Claim with Weak Evidence

The Guardian amplifies genocide allegations, citing scholars and activists who point to the civilian toll and alleged starvation policies as evidence of Israel’s intent to destroy Palestinians. Inflammatory rhetoric, like a general’s call for 50 Palestinian deaths per Israeli killed, is highlighted to bolster this claim. However, the legal threshold for genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention requires clear intent to destroy a group, which is obviously ridiculous.

As Netanyahu said in his interview on Triggernometry yesterday, "If we wanted to commit genocide, we could do it an afternoon." But the Gaza population is growing, not shrinking, despite the tragic losses.

Counter-evidence suggests Israel’s actions, while causing significant civilian harm, do not conclusively meet this threshold. Evacuation orders point to efforts to mitigate civilian casualties, unlike deliberate genocidal campaigns like Rwanda or Srebrenica. A 2024 BESA Center study argued that Israel’s aid restrictions target Hamas’s misuse of resources, not civilian survival, and noted that some aid has been allowed via Rafah.

Legal experts like Eugene Kontorovich and Christian Walter have called genocide claims “absurd” or inconclusive, citing Israel’s defensive objectives post-October 7 and attempts to evacuate civilians. While Amnesty International and a UN Special Committee allege genocide, their reports rely on contested interpretations of intent, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has not ruled definitively on genocide, only noting plausible risks to Palestinian rights.

Plus it's noteworthy to mention their clear and continuous viciously anti-Israel rhetoric. This is like the UN Chief crying about Israel's starving Gazans, even as Israel allows copious amounts of aid into the Strip and tens of foreign countries conduct daily airdrops of humanitarian aid, driving down food prices and leading to so much flour that Gazans have taken to dumping it on the streets.

Misleading Comparisons to Other Conflicts

The Guardian compares Gaza’s 83% civilian death rate to Srebrenica, Rwanda, and Mariupol, suggesting Israel’s actions are uniquely egregious. This oversimplifies Gaza’s context.

Unlike Rwanda’s deliberate ethnic cleansing or Srebrenica’s targeted massacre, Gaza involves urban warfare against embedded militants. A 2024 PMC study estimated civilian death ratios in prior Gaza conflicts: 37.9% in 2008–2009, 48.9% in 2014, and 87.3% in 2023, indicating a trend of high civilian casualties but not an outlier compared to urban conflicts. Mariupol’s siege involved indiscriminate shelling, unlike Israel’s targeted strikes. By equating Gaza to genocides, the Guardian inflates the narrative of Israeli malice, ignoring Hamas’s tactics that exacerbate civilian losses.

Bias in Reporting: A Narrative to Heroize Hamas

The Guardian’s reliance on Hamas-controlled GHM data, unverified Israeli documents, and left-leaning outlets like +972 Magazine reveals a bias that amplifies civilian suffering to vilify Israel while downplaying Hamas’ agency. The article’s failure to critically address GHM’s errors or Hamas’ human shield tactics creates a narrative where Israel is the sole aggressor, and Hamas appears as a passive victim or "heroic resistance". This is compounded by the Guardian's selective use of inflammatory Israeli rhetoric without equivalent scrutiny of Hamas’ stated goal of destroying Israel, as outlined in its 1988 charter.

As the Gaza war continues, accurate and contextual reporting is essential to understanding the human cost and avoiding narratives that distort reality for political ends.