America and Israel have mistreated Palestinians for a long time
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Longstanding international reporting documents extensive abuses of Palestinian rights by Israeli authorities and serious failures by other actors, including the United States, to check those policies: UN and rights‑group findings describe mass killings, forced displacement, settler violence, administrative detention and allegations of apartheid and genocide [1] [2] [3]. Human-rights organizations and UN experts call for accountability and say third states must enforce international law, while other reports and sources also document abuses by Palestinian armed groups — illustrating a conflict with violations by multiple parties [4] [5].
1. Historic drivers: a century of competing claims and repeated wars
The dispute traces back more than a century, with partition, the 1948 war and subsequent conflicts shaping entrenched grievances; key milestones include the 1948 displacement of Palestinians and the 1967 occupations that remain central to the current rights debate [6] [7]. That history frames modern allegations of dispossession, settlement expansion and the continuing absence of a durable negotiated settlement [6] [8].
2. Recent findings: UN, HRW and Amnesty document broad, grave Israeli violations
Multiple major institutions have concluded that Israeli policies and operations have caused mass civilian harm in Gaza and the West Bank, with findings including large-scale deaths, widespread displacement and conclusions that Israeli conduct may amount to war crimes, apartheid and — in UN commission findings — genocide in Gaza [3] [1] [2]. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty report forced displacement, destruction of civilian infrastructure and heavy restrictions on Palestinian civil society and movement [3] [9] [10].
3. Quantifying the toll: displacement, deaths and detention
UN and NGO reporting documents staggering numbers: reports cite tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths in Gaza and West Bank demolition and displacement on a scale not seen since 1967; Human Rights Watch, OCHA and local Israeli NGOs record mass displacement (millions in Gaza across 2024–2025), thousands killed and many thousands detained without charge, including administrative detention figures provided by HRW [3] [11] [2]. These are the metrics human‑rights bodies use to underpin legal conclusions [3] [2].
4. Accountability and international reaction: calls for enforcement, mixed diplomatic responses
UN experts, Amnesty and Human Rights Watch call for international justice mechanisms, enforcement of ICC warrants and for states to use domestic or extraterritorial jurisdiction to hold perpetrators to account [9] [12]. At the same time, diplomatic moves such as Security Council actions and U.S.-led plans have been criticised for legitimising arrangements seen by some analysts as entrenching Israeli control rather than delivering justice or self‑determination for Palestinians [13] [14].
5. U.S. role: strong support, contested responsibilities
The United States has historically and recently provided crucial diplomatic and military support to Israel, shaping the balance of leverage; analysts argue that U.S. backing has enabled Israeli policy choices and that Washington bears responsibility to use its leverage to enforce human‑rights norms [15] [16]. Congressional and policy briefings note continued support for Israel alongside growing U.S. criticism over conduct in the war and humanitarian consequences [17] [16].
6. Abuses by Palestinian armed groups and limits to one‑sided narratives
Independent human‑rights organisations have documented serious violations by Palestinian armed groups, including the 7 October 2023 attacks and abuses against civilians and hostages; Amnesty and HRW stress that abuses by non‑state actors also constitute war crimes and must be addressed in any accountability framework [4] [5]. These findings complicate narratives that attribute all wrongdoing to a single side.
7. Diverging legal conclusions and contested labels
Some bodies — UN commissions and Amnesty — use the terms “genocide” and “apartheid” in describing Israeli actions in Gaza and the occupied territories; other institutions and states dispute those labels or emphasize different legal interpretations. The Carnegie analysis and Security Council debate show geopolitical disagreement about whether policy instruments like the U.S. Gaza plan comply with international law [13] [14].
8. What’s missing from current reporting and key limitations
Available sources document many Israeli systemic abuses and Palestinian armed‑group crimes, but they do not uniformly assess every allegation (for example, some Israeli evidence to support NGO designations of Palestinian groups is described as “not presented” in UN reporting) and sources differ in legal conclusions and methodology [10] [3] [9]. Sources do not provide a single, uncontested ledger of every incident; disputes remain about attribution, intent and remedies [10] [1].
9. Practical implications: policy choices and accountability pathways
Human-rights groups urge states to implement ICC warrants, lift restrictions on Palestinian civil society, and use domestic or universal jurisdiction to prosecute international crimes; UN experts insist any peace plan must end occupation and ensure reparations and self‑determination for Palestinians [9] [12]. The debate is now as much about enforcement and legal remedy as it is about proving past violations.
Summary judgment: reporting from UN bodies, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty documents systemic and severe mistreatment of Palestinians by Israeli authorities, while also documenting serious crimes by Palestinian armed groups; many sources call on third states — notably the United States — to do more to ensure accountability and to align policy with international law [3] [9] [16].