An Israeli military source on Thursday rejected multiple key claims made in the documentary “NAZA” (named after the Hebrew acronym for collateral damage).
The source addressed in detail allegations in the film that he described as false, including that the IDF approved a strike expected to kill 500 civilians, that an intelligence database called Lavender functioned as an authorized kill list, that artificial intelligence autonomously generated targets and an interviewee’s personal assertion that he witnessed genocide.
Many of the allegations, the source said, appear to stem from a misunderstanding of the targeting process. He laid out the multi-stage chain of approval in the IDF that a strike must pass through before it is carried out.
The source described five stages, starting with the intelligence apparatus, made up of analysts who compile and analyze information from a variety of sources, including signals intelligence and human intelligence. An intelligence officer who is not an analyst then verifies the data and decides whether to designate it for the targeting process.
“There’s an intelligence apparatus, then an operational apparatus of planning, meaning a planning apparatus, then legal review, then initial authorization by the commander, then the possibility of real-time information and additional assessment,” the source said.
The source said the planning stage does not involve the same people who conducted the initial intelligence work.
“They [the analysts] are not part of that process,” he said, adding that legal advisers then review both the intelligence and the operational plan before a strike is presented to “an operational commander,” who decides whether to approve, reject or send the plan back for further work.
Even after approval, the source said, “real-time circumstances” can and often do prompt a commander to re-evaluate a proposed strike. Such information, he said, is “not known and not exposed to someone in the beginning of the chain.”
The source said the film’s anonymous interviewees typically recount only that preliminary intelligence stage.
“The film’s narrative rests on critical factual errors that seem to be driven by misunderstandings or misrepresentations of the IDF’s targeting process,” the source said, adding that such testimony “does not establish the final assessments on which commanders relied, the conditions they imposed and the precautions taken during execution, or the attack’s actual effects.”
The source also faulted the filmmakers for not seeking comment before the film’s release.
“The filmmakers did not put their allegations to the IDF for examination and response before publication and have not provided a copy of the film despite explicit request by the IDF,” he said.
‘Never planned’ a strike to kill 500 civilians
Addressing the claim that the IDF approved a strike expected to kill 500 civilians, the source was categorical.
“The IDF has never planned, approved or carried out any strike in the Gaza Strip in which 500 civilians or anything close to that number were expected to be killed as a result of the strike,” he said.
He added that no credible claim was raised during the war that any single strike caused a death toll approaching that figure.
On the artificial intelligence database known as Lavender, the source rejected the claim that it functions as a target list, saying its purpose “is to cross-reference intelligence sources and in order to produce up-to-date layers of information on the operatives of an organized armed group.”
“Inclusion of a person in Lavender does not identify that person as a target, let alone authorize a strike against him,” he said.
The source likewise denied that artificial intelligence tools select targets autonomously.
“In the IDF, artificial intelligence does not determine whether an object or a person is designated as a target, nor whether a target is struck,” he said.
Such systems cannot “constitute the sole basis for identifying a target, let alone select or generate targets on their own,” he added.
Measures to reduce civilian harm
The source described ways in which the military goes beyond what international law strictly requires to reduce civilian harm. International law requires advance warning only “where feasible,” he said, but the IDF adopted a broader practice as a matter of policy rather than legal obligation.
“The IDF, as a matter of policy, not of law, decided to take additional precautions in that issue and issue, in the beginning, widespread warnings from areas it was about to maneuver, allowing the entire population in that area to evacuate if they wanted to,” the source said.
He acknowledged the operational cost.
“Whenever such a warning is issued, you completely lose the element of surprise in the sense that the adversary knows when you are coming, where you are coming from, and the parameters of that action,” he said.
Other measures cited by the source include a dedicated civilian-harm mitigation cell that issued warnings and monitored civilian presence throughout Gaza, independent legal advisers embedded in the planning process and the military’s COGAT unit, which coordinated humanitarian activity and facilitated the entry of more than 3.9 million metric tons of food into the Gaza Strip since October 2023.
“Throughout the war, numerous proposed strikes were canceled or not approved because of the risk to civilians,” the source said.
On the claim that collateral-damage estimates fail to distinguish between adults and minors, the source said, “A civilian is a civilian regardless of age, and no civilian life is assigned lesser value than others.”
The presence of civilians, “and children in particular, led commanders to call off, postpone or replan attacks” throughout the war, he added.
The source cited Hamas’s embedding of terrorist operatives and weapons in civilian areas as context that the film ignores.
“The Hamas terrorist organization embedded in widespread and systematic manner its military operatives, weapons and infrastructure within and beneath civilian areas, exploiting hospitals, schools, mosques for military purposes,” the source said.
He added that fighting occurred in densely populated urban areas because of “a choice made by Hamas and not Israel.”
On claims that strikes on buildings were algorithm-driven, the source said each structure was individually vetted.
“Each structure struck in such cases was individually assessed and identified as a military objective and as a valid target,” he said, adding that “no strike was ever decided based on an algorithm.”
Genocide allegation ‘outrageous and unfounded’
Asked about an anonymous interviewee in “NAZA” who answered “yes” when asked whether he witnessed genocide, the source rejected the claim.
“The allegation of genocide is outrageous and unfounded and the State of Israel has categorically rejected it,” he said.
On casualty figures, the source said Hamas has obscured how many of the dead were combatants by ceasing to publish obituaries for its operatives, unlike in previous conflicts.
The actual number of terrorist operatives killed will be “much larger” than the 15,000 Hamas operatives already officially identified, he assessed.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir separately addressed the film in a statement on Monday, following a consultation with Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Tamir Yadai, Operations Directorate chief Maj. Gen. Itzik Cohen, Military Advocate General Maj. Gen. Itai Ofir, Israeli Air Force commander Maj. Gen. Omer Tishler, the commander of Unit 8200 and IDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin.
Zamir said the film constitutes a deliberate attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the IDF and the State of Israel.
“Based on what has been published thus far, this is not a film offering criticism of the IDF, nor is it an attempt to establish the truth. It is based on blood libels, deliberate distortions of reality, and grave, false accusations against IDF soldiers and commanders,” Zamir said.
“We will not allow IDF soldiers to be made targets through lies and blood libels. Such an attempt must be confronted decisively, using every tool at our disposal—legal, command, and public diplomacy,” he added.
Zamir directed that a multi-agency team be formed to formulate a response and instructed the Military Advocate General to examine possible legal measures against the filmmakers.
