No it is not technically Genocide, if it cannot meet the criteria of Genocide.
Genocide is not a word we throw around because of our feelings. It isn't something we use to wantonly label a war not started by the party you are accusing.
Genocide has a meaning. It's an act with the INTENT to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group through such acts as enumerated as a-e of Art. II of the Genocide Convention.
That verbiage matters as it means the party accused of committing genocide must intend to actually destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group. This is known as a dolus specialis, or special intent. As a standard for mens rea it is quite difficult to meet as you must prove the party's intent. You cannot do that here.
Amnesty and Ireland both know this. This is why they both detailed a broadening of the intent requirement. The reason why all of this delves into antisemitism is because people are creating new standards of law to apply solely to the Jewish state and no one else.
What Ireland’s action (in seeking to broaden the intent requirement) does highlight however, is that under the current definition of Genocide along with the interpretations from precedents, Israel is NOT committing Genocide.