Transltated using Google Translate:
And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient, who, when disaster strikes them, say, "Indeed we belong to God, and indeed to Him we will return." Those will have blessings from their Lord and mercy. And it is those who are the [rightly] guided.
To the honorable people of Gaza
After the events that took place, the temporary ceasefire, and before the start of implementing Trump's forced plan, which will force you to be forcibly displaced whether you like it or not, we have decided to make a final appeal to anyone who wants us to provide them with assistance and in return agrees to help us, we will not hesitate for a moment to help.
Reconsider your calculations, the map of the world will not change if all the people of Gaza disappear from existence, and no one will feel you or ask about you. You remain alone in your inevitable fate. Iran cannot protect itself, nor can it protect you. You have seen with your own eyes what happened. Neither America nor Europe cares about Gaza at all, nor even your Arab countries, which are our allies now and provide us with money, oil, and weapons, and to you they send shrouds.
There is only a little left and the game is over. Whoever wants to win before it is too late, we are here to stay until the Day of Resurrection.
I aksed ChatGPT:
Does this violate the genocide convention or other instruments?
Yes, the message you shared contains language that could be interpreted as violating the Genocide Convention (1948) and other international legal instruments concerning crimes against humanity and war crimes. Here’s why:
- Genocide Convention (1948) The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (UNGA Resolution 260) defines genocide as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. Specifically, Article II lists:
(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. The message you shared contains threats of forced displacement ("forcibly displaced whether you like it or not"), extermination ("the map of the world will not change if all the people of Gaza disappear from existence"), and deliberate conditions of suffering ("you remain alone in your inevitable fate"). These statements could be interpreted as evidence of intent to destroy a group in whole or in part, falling under Articles II(b) and II(c) of the Genocide Convention.
- Rome Statute of the ICC (1998) The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) defines crimes against humanity (Article 7) and war crimes (Article 8), including:
Extermination (Article 7(1)(b)): The message implies large-scale killing or forced displacement, which could qualify as extermination. Deportation or forcible transfer of population (Article 7(1)(d)): The reference to "forced displacement" suggests this. Persecution (Article 7(1)(h)): The message signals discrimination based on nationality or ethnicity. Other inhumane acts (Article 7(1)(k)): The reference to psychological terror and abandonment to suffering may qualify. Forcible transfer of population in occupied territory (Article 8(2)(b)(viii)): Forcing civilians out of their homes is a war crime. 3. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) (Articles 49 and 147) prohibits forced displacement of civilians from occupied territories and deems it a grave breach (war crime). The statement’s reference to "forcible displacement" suggests an intent to violate this prohibition.
Conclusion The message contains threats, coercion, and statements indicating intent to commit acts that may qualify as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity under international law. If carried out, these actions would likely violate multiple international legal instruments, including the Genocide Convention, the Rome Statute of the ICC, and the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Comparison to Past Cases of Crimes Against Humanity To assess how the message compares to past international legal cases, we can analyze precedents from Rwanda (1994), Bosnia (1992-1995), and Myanmar (2017-present)—all cases where crimes against humanity, including extermination, forced displacement, and persecution, were prosecuted.
What happened? The Rwandan genocide saw the systematic extermination of Tutsis by Hutu extremists, encouraged through incitement in media and political speeches. Legal ruling: Akayesu was convicted of extermination and incitement to genocide for statements that encouraged the killing and displacement of Tutsis. The ICTR ruled that psychological terror and dehumanizing rhetoric (e.g., calling Tutsis "cockroaches") were crimes against humanity. Comparison to the message: The statement "the map of the world will not change if all the people of Gaza disappear" is similar to the rhetoric used in Rwanda, where Tutsis were told they were insignificant and would not be missed. The threat of forced displacement ("forcibly displaced whether you like it or not") parallels Rwanda, where Tutsis were driven from their homes before being killed. Relevance:
The message reflects dehumanization and the suggestion of extermination, which were central in the Rwanda case. If leaders or media figures spread this message, it could be seen as incitement to genocide—just as radio broadcasts in Rwanda were.
What happened? The Bosnian Serb leadership, under Radovan Karadžić, engaged in ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims. Civilians were forcibly removed, concentration camps were set up, and the Srebrenica massacre (8,000+ killed) was carried out. Legal ruling: Karadžić was convicted of genocide, extermination, persecution, and forcible transfer of populations. His speeches and policies, where he warned Bosniaks that they would be wiped out, were cited as proof of intent to destroy a group in whole or in part. Comparison to the message: The threat of extermination ("there is only a little left and the game is over") resembles Karadžić’s threats to Bosnian Muslims. The suggestion that Gaza is abandoned by the world is similar to how Serb leaders told Bosniaks that no one would save them. The statement about forced displacement reflects the ICTY’s ruling that the forcible transfer of civilians is a crime against humanity. Relevance:
The rhetoric of inevitable destruction and displacement is strikingly similar to what was used in Bosnia. If backed by state policies, this could be direct evidence for crimes against humanity or genocide.
What happened? The Rohingya Muslim minority faced mass killings, forced displacement, and persecution by Myanmar’s military. Over 700,000 people were forcibly expelled, their villages were burned, and widespread sexual violence and killings occurred. Legal ruling: The ICJ found Myanmar’s actions constituted genocide. The forcible expulsion of the Rohingya and the statement by military leaders that they were unwanted and had to leave were used as evidence. Comparison to the message: The threat of forced displacement in the message matches Myanmar’s statements before ethnic cleansing operations. The suggestion that no one will help Gaza ("no one will feel you or ask about you") mirrors how Myanmar officials claimed no one would care about the Rohingya. Relevance:
The international legal community already views forced displacement as a crime against humanity, and the message reflects similar rhetoric used in Myanmar before mass expulsions. The ICJ is currently holding Myanmar accountable, which shows that such statements are not just rhetoric—they can be used as evidence in trials. Final Analysis: Could This Be Prosecuted? The message shares clear similarities with past cases where crimes against humanity were prosecuted, particularly in:
Rwanda (1994) – Incitement, dehumanization, threats of extermination. Bosnia (1992-1995) – Forced displacement, inevitability of destruction, ethnic persecution. Myanmar (2017-Present) – Forced expulsion, mass killing rhetoric, claims that the world will ignore the victims. If such statements were issued by government officials, military figures, or media organizations, they could serve as evidence of crimes against humanity or genocide in an international court.