NAZA: Why are old Gaza allegations causing new fury in Israel?

The release of NAZA, a documentary by Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, has triggered intense political and public backlash across Israel ahead of October’s national elections. Although many of the film’s central claims—such as reports that the Israeli military used artificial intelligence to identify targets in Gaza and sometimes destroyed whole buildings to eliminate single individuals—had been reported earlier in 2024, the film’s international acclaim brought the issues back into the centre of domestic debate. NAZA received a 25-minute standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival, a reaction that preceded a wave of denunciations at home.

Senior political figures and military leaders condemned the film. Culture Minister Miki Zohar urged that the directors be stripped of their citizenship and investigated by internal intelligence for treason. Army chief Eyal Zamir dismissed the documentary as a blood libel and ordered a legal inquiry aimed at identifying its military and intelligence sources. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referenced NAZA while pushing legislation to revoke the citizenship of people he said were smearing Israeli soldiers. In public spaces, the filmmakers have faced personal attacks, including graffiti in Ashdod branding them "traitors."

Critics of the reaction say the ferocity of the response reflects broader media and societal dynamics. Journalists and free-press advocates point to a narrowing of coverage of Gaza: a 2025 Molad study found that only 3 percent of Channel 12’s coverage of the war’s first six months mentioned Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, and of 206 war-related images and clips aired by the network, two showed Palestinian civilian casualties. The Committee to Protect Journalists reported escalating censorship and harassment in Israel in late 2025, with some journalists characterising media coverage as part of the war effort.

Voices across the political spectrum have condemned NAZA’s authors, including figures typically critical of the government. Former military chief Gadi Eisenkot decried the film for "moral blindness" and harming the state, while former prime minister Naftali Bennett called it a "horrific blood libel." Supporters of the filmmakers, and some press-freedom advocates, argue the mainstream media largely failed to scrutinise the army’s conduct or report Gaza’s perspective, contributing to the shock and alarm that followed the film’s release. Observers say the controversy highlights entrenched national narratives about the war—framing civilian Palestinian deaths as unavoidable collateral damage—and the limited domestic attention previously paid to allegations against the military.