A gripping new film, NAZA, has premiered at the Venice Film Festival, shedding light on the inner workings of Israel’s military decision‑making in the Gaza Strip. Directed by Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor – the duo behind the acclaimed No Other Land – the project is executive produced by Jonathan Glazer and James Wilson and carried under the Guardian’s banner. Through covert night‑time interviews on Tel Aviv rooftops, disillusioned former intelligence personnel reveal a stark calculus of death, the use of artificial intelligence to identify targets, and the disturbing logistics of what they term “Naza” – a euphemism for civilian collateral damage. The film’s revelations have already sparked intense debate, not only for its explosive allegations but also for the way it captures the city’s stark juxtaposition of affluent life and the spectre of war just 60 km away.
Shadowy Night‑Time Confessions
The interviewees appear with their faces obscured and voices altered, a tactic designed to protect their identities while still allowing them to speak candidly. Filmed under the cover of darkness on the rooftops of Tel Aviv – the de facto headquarters of Israeli intelligence – the documentary creates a dramatic backdrop that mirrors the moral ambiguity it seeks to explore. The camera drifts across gleaming apartment blocks, occasionally zooming in on glimpses of prosperous domestic life, a visual reminder that the decisions made aloft have tangible consequences for ordinary people. The directors’ choice to keep the speakers anonymous underscores the perilous environment in which these former officers now find themselves, yet it also raises questions about the evidentiary weight of their testimony.
AI‑Driven Targeting and the “Error” Rate
Central to the film’s narrative is the claim that Israel’s intelligence services have outsourced reconnaissance to a computer program. According to the interviewees, this software analyses call patterns from mobile phones linked to known Hamas operatives, then flags tens of thousands of other devices that exhibit similar behaviours. Those flagged become targets, invariably struck at night in pre‑mapped residential buildings. The documentary cites a permitted “error” margin of 15 % for these operations, while another source speaks of an anticipated “Naza” figure of 20 civilian deaths per strike – a metric that appears highly flexible. The film suggests that this algorithmic approach reduces human judgment to a cold spreadsheet, where civilian lives are tallied as acceptable collateral. The interviewees dismiss the notion of human shields, insisting that the targeting is driven entirely by data rather than by the presence of militants among civilians.
Political Underpinnings and International Friction
Beyond the technicalities of targeting, NAZA delves into the political machinations surrounding the conflict. The documentary alleges the existence of an intelligence unit that operates in direct loyalty to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, engaging in covert activities aimed at discrediting international human‑rights organisations that might oppose Israel’s leadership. These “dirty tricks” are portrayed as part of a broader strategy to shape global perception and neutralize criticism. The film also touches on the “cleansing” of northern Gaza, describing sniper operations that target civilians desperate for food, often unaware that they have entered militarised zones. The interviewees recount how the logistical framework for these operations is coordinated, highlighting a perceived disconnect between military actions and the humanitarian impact on the ground.
Historical Parallels and Moral Reflections
One of the most provocative segments of NAZA involves a speaker who draws a comparison between contemporary events and historical atrocities, invoking the term “nazism” in a manner that the film presents as both glib and unsettling. While the documentary acknowledges that Gaza’s suffering is not equivalent to the Holocaust, it does not shy away from the ease with which such analogies surface in public discourse. The film also references the bombing of Dresden as a more apt historical parallel, suggesting that the anguish of Gaza is being viewed through a lens of familiar horror. These reflections serve to underscore the moral complexity of the situation, prompting viewers to confront uncomfortable questions about the language used to describe mass civilian death.
Why it Matters
NAZA arrives at a pivotal moment in the ongoing Gaza conflict, offering a rare glimpse into the decision‑making processes that shape military operations and their human cost. By exposing the alleged reliance on AI for targeting, the film raises urgent ethical and legal questions about the use of autonomous systems in warfare, particularly concerning compliance with international humanitarian law. The documentary’s claims about political interference in intelligence activities and efforts to undermine human‑rights scrutiny also highlight the broader battle over narrative and accountability on the global stage. As audiences grapple with the film’s revelations, the debate over transparency, the protection of whistle‑blowers, and the moral responsibilities of states in conflict zones is set to intensify, making NAZA not just a cinematic event but a catalyst for policy and public discourse.