Following an Israel Hayom report revealing that the Israel Defense Forces was preparing a detailed response to the documentary "NAZA," the IDF Spokesperson on Thursday published the military's rebuttal to the allegations presented in the film. The IDF said the film presents a "distorted, misleading and disingenuous picture" of the military's target-planning and strike process, and that its narrative is based on "substantial factual errors" stemming from a distorted and manipulative portrayal of reality.
In its official response, the IDF addresses a series of allegations concerning how decisions are made on strikes in the Gaza Strip. The military stressed that its binding directives explicitly distinguish between terrorists and uninvolved civilians, and that the targeting process requires steps to minimize civilian harm to the greatest extent feasible.
The IDF further said it "has never planned, approved or carried out a strike in Gaza in which 500 civilians or anything close to that number were expected to be killed." The military added that at no point had any credible allegation been made that an IDF strike caused a death toll on that scale or anything close to it.
One of the central issues addressed by the military is the use of artificial intelligence. According to the response, artificial intelligence has never independently selected targets for IDF strikes. The military said targets are identified by qualified intelligence officers, strikes are planned by the relevant professional personnel, and the ultimate decision on whether to attack a target is made by operational commanders.
The IDF also rejected the claim that it has a policy permitting strikes based on a predetermined number of civilians who may be harmed. It further clarified that "Lavender" is not a database of targets approved for attack, but rather a database that assists intelligence analysts.
The military stressed that issuing an evacuation warning does not constitute permission to attack an area while disregarding civilians who remain there. It also rejected the claim that it fails to examine the results of its strikes, saying that outcomes are reviewed, including in cases involving unintended civilian harm, and that such reviews are used for debriefings and lessons learned.
The statement said some of the people interviewed in the film, who are presented as having served in the IDF Intelligence Directorate, describe only limited and preliminary stages of intelligence work and do not portray the broader process through which strikes are planned and approved.
According to the IDF, that process also involves operational personnel, professionals responsible for minimizing civilian harm, legal advisers and commanders who ultimately approve or reject proposed strikes.
The military further argued that the film omits context it considers essential to understanding the war in Gaza, including the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led massacre in southern Israel, Hamas' operations from within the civilian population and the measures the IDF says it has taken to minimize civilian harm.
These measures, according to the military, include advance warnings before strikes, the selection of munitions and strike planning, as well as decisions to alter plans, cancel strikes and forgo military opportunities.
The IDF also addressed the film's title, "NAZA," a Hebrew military acronym referring to collateral damage, or the assessment of expected civilian harm from a strike. According to the military, such assessments are used both to determine whether a strike is lawful and to identify precautions aimed at reducing harm to uninvolved civilians.
"Outrageously, the film deepens its distortion of reality through manipulative editing of interviews and allusions to historical atrocities, while falsely and baselessly attributing malicious intentions to the IDF," the military said.
The IDF added that it is open to criticism and considers it important to learn from substantiated allegations. Suspected violations of the law or IDF orders are examined and, where warranted, addressed through disciplinary proceedings, criminal investigations or other measures, the military said.
Concluding its response, the IDF said the filmmakers did not submit their allegations to the military for examination and comment before publication and did not provide the IDF with a copy of the film after it was screened, despite a request from the military.
