The documentary Naza, winner of the Special Jury Prize at the Venice Film Festival, has triggered deep controversy inside Israel after drawing on the testimonies of 24 officers from Unit 8200 who described what they said was the systematic targeting of civilians in the Gaza Strip through artificial intelligence systems and with political approval.
Analysts specialising in Israeli affairs and international law told Al Jazeera’s Behind the News programme that the testimonies are significant because they build a narrative of genocide from within the Israeli military itself and challenge Israel’s established arguments before international courts.
Dismantling the Israeli Narrative
Israeli affairs expert Muhannad Mustafa said the central significance of the film begins with its title, Naza, which he said means “collateral damage” in Hebrew.
According to Mustafa, the documentary’s importance lies in its collection of testimony from officers who served in the elite Unit 8200 intelligence division responsible for surveillance. Rather than relying on international experts, the film documents allegations of genocide through testimony from people who served inside Israel’s own military establishment.
Mustafa said the testimonies expose what he described as an Israeli culture that dehumanises Palestinians and treats the killing of hundreds of people as little more than collateral damage.
International law professor William Schabas argued that the evidence presented in the film fundamentally undermines claims that civilian deaths were simply “collateral damage” or the result of “individual mistakes”.
Schabas said collateral damage refers to civilian harm caused while striking a legitimate target without sufficient regard for civilians. By contrast, he said the officers’ testimonies describe direct and systematic attacks aimed at destroying Gaza’s civilian population.
The documentary was filmed secretly over three years on rooftops in Tel Aviv, with participants’ identities concealed and their voices digitally altered for protection.
It features explicit testimony from members of the Israeli military who said they directly witnessed mass killings and the burning of residential buildings being used by Gaza residents as shelters.
The testimonies also describe civilians being targeted and killed during food aid distributions, while exposing what the film presents as secret systems used by Israel during its war on Gaza.
On the technical and tactical level, soldiers involved in remote surveillance and targeting described the use of secret methods, including artificial intelligence systems used to identify large numbers of people suspected of being low-ranking Hamas figures.
According to the soldiers, once individuals had been identified, the military would strike their homes at night despite knowing in advance that their families would also be killed in the attack.
Unprecedented Alarm Inside Israel
The Israeli reaction reflected the level of concern generated by the film.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the documentary posed a direct threat to the security and reputation of the Israeli military, while Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir ordered the formation of a multidisciplinary team to confront its impact.
Culture Minister Miki Zohar went further, calling for the citizenship of directors Yuval Abraham and Rachel Sur to be revoked.
Political science professor Hassan Ayoub attributed the unusually sharp reaction to profound political and security concern that the film could fracture Israel’s “national consensus” and weaken the internal right-wing bloc.
Ayoub said the fact that the testimonies came from within the military itself also weakens one of Israel’s traditional lines of defence, namely the argument that domestic investigations are sufficient and international investigations are therefore unnecessary.
Mustafa described the Israeli response as evidence of “moral fragility”.
He argued that an internal discourse asserting that “there are no innocents in Gaza” becomes a source of panic when the consequences of such thinking are exposed as operational military orders.
According to Mustafa, the documentary could also have a deterrent effect by placing Israeli military conduct under greater scrutiny.
Legal Significance and the Challenge of Accountability
From a legal perspective, Schabas described the film’s testimonies as “dynamite” and potentially powerful evidence that could strengthen South Africa’s case before the International Court of Justice and support the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court against Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant.
Schabas also said Israel had lost most of its international allies, with only the United States and Germany continuing to stand firmly behind it.
In 2024, the International Criminal Court in The Hague issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. Israel rejected the decision and described it as politically motivated.
Ayoub said the documentary contributes to what he described as a structural shift in global public opinion when considered alongside reports from organisations including B’Tselem, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
He called on the Palestinian Authority to incorporate the testimonies into international accountability files.
Mustafa concluded that the legal track has already established what he described as the reality of genocide, but said the main obstacle remains the position of the United States, which he accused of campaigning against international courts and providing Israel with political space to avoid accountability.
According to the latest figures from Gaza’s Ministry of Health, the death toll since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023 has risen to 73,786 Palestinians killed and 174,771 wounded, most of them women and children.
