Gaza bombed to anihilation – (Image by Prensa Latina)
6 Aug 2025 – The image is brutal. The explosion—like a torn throat—shatters the silence of the night and lights up the ruins of Gaza surrounding the UN clinic, which blew into a thousand pieces, leaving behind yet another toll of dead and injured civilians. This is not an excess. It is a message. The missile did not only strike a medical facility: it struck the very threshold of imaginable horror. This destruction was no accident. It was the result of a war logic forged behind closed doors.
The decisive meeting and the shadow of international law
The bombing of the UN clinic cannot be analyzed as an isolated event. It occurred amid internal military dissent but, above all, at the apex of a high-level political decision: the endorsement of a total occupation strategy. Far from being a tactical error, this act emerges as the manifestation of a premeditated policy. The attack on a UN-protected facility, in the midst of discussions about a “final solution” for Gaza, places Israel in a position that explicitly defies international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions. The deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure—especially of medical and humanitarian nature—is a recognized war crime. What makes this event particularly grave, however, is its apparent role in a broader narrative of conquest, not just combat.
The cabinet and the approval of total occupation
The decision for total occupation resulted from a tense war cabinet meeting. The bombing of the clinic occurred precisely as the conquest strategy was being discussed and approved. Prime Minister Netanyahu, facing mounting internal pressure and public military dissent over the plan, succeeded in imposing his vision. Internal government sources have revealed that Defense Minister Israel Katz supported the measure, calling it a necessary step to “ensure Israel’s long-term security.” The approval of this total occupation plan—an act of civilizational warfare—was the turning point.
The ensuing media and institutional uproar was not over the bombing itself—attacks on civilian infrastructure have tragically become routine in this war—but over what it represented: the confirmation that the military strategy no longer seeks “security” but a complete reconfiguration of the territory.
Ideological echoes, dissent, and global complicity
Within Israel, warning voices quickly emerged. Beyond military dissent, some doctors and rabbis have spoken out, warning of the moral and humanitarian costs of this path. These unexpected institutional voices from within Israeli society reflect a deep ethical fracture—a fear that the policy of systematic annihilation is destroying the country’s very soul.
Paradoxically, there is a chilling counterpoint to this dissent. Extremist factions of rabbis and ultranationalist figures have openly justified the bombing of hospitals and the annihilation of the civilian population, under the logic that total war has no limits. This ideological echo within Israel is the seed of the conquest policy now fully materialized.
On the international stage, the echo of this attack resonates with deafening silence. Beyond ritual condemnations, the inaction of most countries—particularly in the West—is alarming. The absence of a forceful diplomatic response, the outright lack of diplomatic breaks or the imposition of real sanctions—such as those advocated by Lula da Silva in Brazil—becomes a form of complicity through omission. This collective inaction tacitly validates the genocidal policy, allowing Israel to act with the certainty that its crimes will bear no real geopolitical consequences. At this point, the responsibility of every nation becomes inescapable, and the silence of leaders can be interpreted as an “amen” to barbarism.
The clinic attack: official version and the dark unofficial truth
According to statements by the Israeli army (IDF), the attack was justified as an “unavoidable collateral damage” during an operation aimed at “neutralizing a Hamas command and control center” supposedly operating beneath the facility. The IDF claimed prior warnings had been issued and that the building housed combatants. However, no concrete evidence was provided to support these claims, and facts on the ground directly contradict this narrative.
On the other hand, Western intelligence sources and investigative journalists have revealed that the official information is, at best, a cover-up. The clinic, managed by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), was one of the last operational medical infrastructures in northern Gaza. According to these sources, the bombing was a deliberate act designed to accelerate the forced evacuation of the civilian population that still remained in the area. The attack was a clear and brutal message: there will never again be a safe place in Gaza, and the Palestinian people will never again have guarantees of anything. Either they leave, or they disappear.
Still, it is deeply ironic: they have nowhere to go. They are trapped in gas chambers. They are wanted dead, and dead they shall be—so that, in the future, when “survivors” are remembered and tearful films are made about this horror, there will be no John Williams to compose the soundtrack.
From war crime to the transformation of the state
The missile that destroyed the clinic was not merely a lethal instrument. It was the practical manifestation of a political logic seeking the systematic expulsion of the humanitarian. Denouncing genocide is no longer sufficient unless accompanied by active political response. The total occupation plan for Gaza is not a defensive act; it is a structural transformation of state crime that defies the international order supposedly designed to prohibit it. When a state decides that annihilation and conquest are the solution to conflict—and the rest of the world looks away—we all become accomplices to that decision. It is, ultimately, a silent self-incrimination of the international community in the face of its own moral and legal failure.
Analysis of international legal architecture
The attack on the clinic is not only a war crime; it is a direct blow to the legal architecture that sustains the global order. The Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly prohibits attacks on medical facilities and humanitarian personnel. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued provisional measures requiring Israel to avoid genocidal acts. The bombing of a UN clinic, without credible evidence of military justification, is a flagrant mockery of these orders. The inaction of the international community and the UN Security Council not only undermines the credibility of these institutions but also creates a dangerous precedent: that international law can be ignored by powerful states without facing real consequences. This power vacuum is the true crisis the world now faces, risking the validation of a “final solution” for other oppressed peoples to come.