On at least 9 different occasions in the last week the BBC has covered Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz’s comments regarding point twelve of the Trump 20 Point Plan for Gaza, the optional emigration of Gazan civilians.
Speaking on May 27th Katz reiterated the governments commitment to point 12, saying it would happen
“At the right time and in the right manner”
BBC correspondents responded with the repeated claim that this amounted to ethnic cleansing or forced displacement, a war crime.
On the BBC Website Tabby Wilson reported on the 29th:
“the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians from Gaza – which could amount to the forced displacement of civilians – a war crime”
Yolande Knell on the World Service Newsday programme of the same day:
“this week you had Israel’s defence Minister, Israel Katz. Who is a member of the Prime Minister’s Likud Party and he said that the highly controversial plan for Palestinians to emigrate still remained in place. That was still a long-term plan. He said it would happen at the right time and in the right manner and of course, forcing the population to leave, that, human rights lawyers say, would amount to a policy of ethnic cleansing, a war crime, therefore, and a crime against humanity.”
Multiple reports from Middle East Correspondent Emir Nader made similar allegations across World Service and the BBC Radio 4 6 O’Clock News:
“today, the Israeli Defence Minister, Israel Katz, once again vowed to implement what he called voluntary emigration in Gaza at the proper time. Palestinians read that as a euphemism for forced ethnic cleansing”
While on the World Service Newshour James Menendez put the question to Gershon Baskin that not only would the implementation of point 12 be a war crime but also, somehow, a violation of the ceasefire:
“I mean Israel Katz, the Defence Minister, spoke this week about the voluntary emigration plan from Gaza. I mean. That is also a violation of the ceasefire. Isn’t it? And in effect it’s ethnic cleansing, isn’t it?”
But does the BBC always consider the voluntary migration of civilians out of war zones a war crime?
On May 6th, the BBC ran an article on the website by Jessica Parker and Paul Brown titled “To stay or risk the ‘Road of Death’ – Ukrainian civilians trapped in frontline city” which seemed to argue the exact opposite.
“Any attempt to leave Oleshky, say locals, is to gamble with your life along what’s been dubbed “The Road of Death” – due to reports of heavy mining… Despite the dangers, there have been some successful, recent evacuations along the ‘Road of Death’, south-west along the route of the Dnipro River. “Leaving Oleshky, everyone prayed to God that we wouldn’t hit a mine,” says Volodymyr, who’s in his 50s. Terrorised by drones and traumatised by seeing his neighbour’s body carted away after she was hit by shelling, he says his family finally took the decision to leave. “None of us could endure it any longer.” Volodymyr recounts being driven out in an ambulance in an evacuation arranged by volunteers…The Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, Dmytro Lubinets, says he has appealed to Russian authorities for a “humanitarian corridor” to allow safe evacuations. Lubinets accuses Russia of inflicting “deliberate terrorism” against civilians.”
So when Ukrainian civilians are trapped in a war zone, unable to choose to leave and facing dangers when they do so, that’s terrorism against Civilians, but when Palestinians are offered the chance to leave it becomes a war crime.
In September 2025 Quentin Sommerville went further in his piece “As Russian army inches closer, Ukrainians must decide to stay or go” where he argued:
“An estimated 218,000 people need evacuation from the Donetsk region, in eastern Ukraine, including 16,500 children.”
The evacuation of civilians in Ukraine is a moral imperative, but in Gaza is a war crime.
To look to another conflict, during the battle for Mosul in Iraq UNHRC described a catastrophic situation where:
“An estimated 100,000 civilians are effectively being held as human shields by ISIS fighters in West Mosul, where they are living in conditions of “penury and panic” without food, water or fuel”
And the BBC at that time did indeed name a war crime – that of using civilians as Human Shields. Quoting UNHRC Iraq Representative Bruno Geddo Daniel Dunford reported:
“IS (ISIS) may want many of the city’s residents to stay put until the battle begins in order to use them for their own tactical benefit.
“When [the civilians] flee, they will try to slow down the coalition forces by using civilians as human shields.”
While on BBC News Youtube Karen Allen reported in a video titled “Battle for Mosul: IS Herded Human Shields Like Sheep”
“These people are why the push to dislodge IS is proving to be so tough. Until a few days ago even these children were held by the jihadis as Human Shields, entire families turned into tools of war”
Once again the crime is to not evacuate civilians from a warzone, while the humanitarian imperative is to do so. Only in Gaza is this moral absolute inverted.
This framing of Gazans choosing to leave Gaza in accordance with the agreed upon ceasefire deal is not just misleading to audiences, it represents a willingness to accept that this specific group of people must be held in place in this horrific warzone, breaking with every norm of urban warfare, because the alternative may be of strategic benefit to Israel.
The BBC is tacitly accepting that Hamas cannot operate without its Human Shields and therefore this specific group of civilians must stay put.
Misleading and biased reporting yes, but misleading and biased reporting that is also suggestive of a much deeper moral rot.
Shows the everlasting hypocrisy of the BBC – always the anti Jewish approach – time they looked in the proverbial mirror!