Israel would rather not watch NAZA

NAZA, a new documentary by Yuval Avraham and Rachel Szor, has become a flashpoint in Israel after failing to find a domestic distributor or public screening despite the filmmakers' stated intent to show it widely. The film, whose Hebrew acronym translates as “collateral damage,” drew a warm reception abroad at the Venice Film Festival where its creators received a 25-minute standing ovation and a special jury prize. Back in Israel, government figures and senior executives said they would "take steps" in response to the movie, with suggestions including the unprecedented possibility of revoking the filmmakers' citizenship.

Much of the criticism levelled at NAZA has focused on its journalistic methods and alleged political motivations. Prominent investigative journalist Raviv Drucker told one of the directors that broadcasting the film would be "difficult" for multiple reasons and said he would not air it because he judged it to rely on anonymous testimony and to fall short of professional standards. Other commentators on the Israeli left echoed concerns about sourcing and accused the filmmakers of pursuing attention or serving foreign political interests.

Beyond technical critiques, the backlash has taken on a cultural and moral dimension: numerous public figures and ordinary citizens have declared they will not watch the film. The refusal to engage with NAZA has been framed by supporters of the boycott as a principled stand against material that they say discredits Israel, while critics of that stance see it as part of a broader unwillingness to confront evidence about the conduct and consequences of military operations in Gaza.

The dispute over NAZA highlights divisions over accountability, media oversight and public discourse during the Gaza war. Supporters of the film argue it challenges official narratives and raises questions about methods of killing and the adequacy of military and legal investigations. Opponents respond that airing such material abroad and refusing domestic scrutiny amounts to betrayal or gives ammunition to Israel's critics. The clash underscores how documentary film can become a focal point for larger debates about truth, identity and responsibility in a deeply polarized environment.