3 hours ago
8
The team behind the award-winning film NAZA, which details the Israeli military’s targeting policies in Gaza and its alleged acceptance of high numbers of civilian deaths, have revealed they spoke to more than 100 sources with knowledge of the military systems used in the war.
The disclosure came in response to an Israel Defense Forces statement seeking to discredit the documentary.
In its response, which the IDF said was based on statements made by the film-makers and a review made by a representative who had attended a viewing, the Israeli military claimed there were “substantial errors” in the film and that it had relied on interviews with two dozen intelligence and other troops who had only a partial picture of the target approval process.
At the centre of the IDF’s rebuttal was its often repeated claim that its rules of engagement explicitly distinguish between militants and civilians and prohibit deliberately targeting civilians, while requiring commanders to take steps to minimise civilian harm, claims that have long been challenged over the years by critics.
While acknowledging that it used AI to help recommend potential targets in Gaza, the IDF also said final decisions made on strikes, and the risk of civilian casualties, were signed off by officers.
The IDF also denied that it had approved, planned or carried out an attack anticipating 500 civilian casualties in pursuit of a single Hamas target.
The IDF statement follows previous efforts by Israeli politicians to dismiss NAZA – a military acronym euphemistically used by Israeli intelligence to indicate the number of civilians that it expects will be killed in an airstrike – which have accompanied death threats against the film’s directors, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, and calls by the country’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, for them to be stripped of their Israeli citizenship.
It also echoed previous complaints by some Israeli critics – including journalists – that the film’s military sources were anonymised, despite the fact that source protection in media investigations is commonplace and regarded by much of the media as an ethical requirement.
“The film NAZA presents a distorted, misleading, and unrealistic picture of the IDF’s target planning and strike processes. The film’s narrative is based on fundamental factual errors stemming from a skewed and manipulative portrayal,” the statement added.
Responding to the IDF statement, the Guardian, which produced the film, disclosed further details of how the team had verified the allegations which involved scores of interviews with those with knowledge of IDF targeting and authorisation processes.
A spokesperson said: “The IDF’s attempt to portray the 24 participants in NAZA as junior-ranking officers involved only in the early stages of the targeting process is false.
“They include officers and soldiers who were involved in multiple stages of the targeting process in Gaza, including intelligence, operations and the final authorisation process.
“The process of assessing the credibility of the testimonies was rigorous. It included leaked classified documents, detailed verification of specific strikes and corroboration via a wider pool of confidential journalistic sources who did not appear on camera in the film.
“Over the past three years we have together interviewed more than 100 sources familiar with IDF systems used in the war in Gaza, including senior-ranking commanders directly involved in the authorisation of strikes.
“The Guardian stands fully behind the film, which builds on three years of detailed reporting by the Guardian and our partners. Several highly respected news organisations have subsequently confirmed the IDF’s use of AI-driven systems in the Gaza offensive and the loosening of safeguards to protect civilians, including the New York Times, Washington Post and Associated Press.”
While Netanyahu has claimed that Israeli military safeguards have led to one of the lowest civilian-combatant ratios in modern warfare, that has been challenged by the IDF’s own leaked casualty assessments, by the UN’s commission of inquiry in 2024 and research by NGOs including Action on Armed Violence.
--
English (US) ·