Full Breakdown
IDF Rebuts “NAZA” Documentary Claims
By Drooid · · How we work
Background: Film’s Allegations and Reception
The 80-minute documentary “NAZA”—directed by Oscar-winning Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor—examines IDF targeting procedures during the Gaza war. The title derives from the Hebrew acronym *nezek agavi* (“collateral damage”). It is built on interviews with 24 anonymous Israeli soldiers and intelligence personnel who describe target-selection processes, estimate civilian casualties, and allege the use of AI tools such as “Lavender” to generate kill lists.
Premiering at the Venice International Film Festival in September 2026, the film received a standing ovation and the Special Jury Prize. It has since screened at San Sebastián, New York, and other festivals, and will be released worldwide with a free streaming window on The Guardian’s website in late November.
Official Statements & Responses
The IDF issued a 10-page English response and a 17-page Hebrew version after a military representative attended a public screening. Key points of the rebuttal include:
- Target-selection authority – Only authorized intelligence officers identify potential targets, professional planners develop strike plans, and operational commanders make final decisions. AI does not independently select targets.
- Civilian-casualty thresholds – The IDF rejects the claim that a strike was approved with an expected 500 civilian deaths and denies any policy that automatically authorises attacks based on fixed civilian-casualty numbers.
- Lavender system – Described as a database that assists analysts; inclusion in Lavender does not authorize a strike.
- Legal and moral safeguards – The statement cites IDF directives that distinguish combatants from civilians, prohibit intentional attacks on civilians, and require commanders to mitigate civilian harm. It notes the film omits references to legal advisers, commanders, and mitigation measures such as evacuation warnings and munition selection.
- Review of incidents – The IDF says it has reviewed “hundreds of incidents” involving unintended civilian harm, using those assessments to adjust tactics and, where warranted, initiate disciplinary or criminal investigations.
- Genocide allegation – The army calls the claim of genocide “outrageous and unfounded,” arguing interviewees lacked authority to assess intent under international law.
Criticism & Opposition
The filmmakers dispute the IDF’s characterisation. The Guardian notes that several major news organisations—The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Associated Press—have confirmed the IDF’s use of AI-driven systems in the Gaza offensive, a point the IDF rejects.
Israeli Culture Minister Miki Zohar described the film as “treason against the state” and called for revoking the directors’ citizenship. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also sharply criticised the documentary.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Casualty-threshold policy – The film alleges pre-set civilian-casualty thresholds (e.g., 20 or 200 civilians) for authorising strikes; the IDF denies any such policy, stating thresholds are “much lower” and not publicly disclosed.
- Evidence specificity – The documentary does not provide dates, locations, or concrete casualty figures for the alleged strikes, which the IDF describes as “general and unverifiable.” Independent reporting has offered varying casualty estimates for the Gaza war, ranging from 70,000 to over 74,000 Palestinian deaths, but the film’s internal figures remain uncorroborated.