Israeli Military Disputes Claims in 'NAZA' Film, Questions Witness Credibility

The Israeli military has responded to accusations presented in the film "NAZA," rejecting some testimonies and questioning the credibility of the sources. The army stated that certain accounts attributed to individuals featured in the film touched upon national and military strategies, matters deemed beyond the expected knowledge of junior-ranking soldiers. The military also noted narratives involving soldiers from military intelligence, asserting that some described situations did not align with their presumed roles.

The military's critique of the film's content also pointed to the imprecise use of legal terminology by non-legal professionals and internal contradictions within some testimonies. For instance, the army highlighted claims in the film that equated unintentional damage from supposedly legal attacks with intentional harm or "genocide," interpreting this as a confusion of legal concepts. A military spokesperson affirmed that operations in Gaza are officially aimed at protecting Israeli civilians and confronting armed groups like Hamas, while adhering to international law and the laws of armed conflict. They stated that strikes target military objectives with unprecedented measures to minimize civilian harm, accusing Hamas of systematically operating within civilian areas.

Regarding allegations of soldier misconduct, the military emphasized its commitment to investigating specific suspicions through established mechanisms and holding individuals accountable if violations are proven. Military orders require any soldier witnessing a legal violation to report it for evaluation and potential investigation, a duty that extends to those whose testimonies appear in the film if they witnessed such events.

Furthermore, the army denied that artificial intelligence systems make strike decisions, clarifying that target selection and approval are solely human decisions made by personnel according to approved military procedures. The military concluded by reiterating that decisions on military operations are human responsibilities and that any claims of legal violations must be examined through independent investigation and enforcement mechanisms.