IDF Slams 'False and Manipulative' Documentary on Gaza Civilian Casualties

The spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has issued a strong condemnation of the documentary film 'Niz'a' (Collateral Damage), accusing its creators of presenting a distorted, misleading, and biased portrayal of IDF operations in Gaza. The IDF asserts that the film is based on significant factual errors and manipulative distortions, failing to adhere to good-faith verification processes.

In a detailed response, the IDF refuted several key claims made in the film. It emphasized that IDF directives clearly distinguish between combatants and uninvolved civilians in Gaza, strictly prohibiting targeting civilians and mandating the minimization of harm to them. The IDF denied ever planning, approving, or executing an attack in Gaza where the expected civilian death toll was around 500, nor did it face credible accusations of such casualties. The military also clarified that artificial intelligence does not independently select targets; this process involves authorized intelligence officers, relevant professionals for planning, and operational commanders for final approval.

The IDF further stated that its directives do not allow for automatic approval of attacks based on a predetermined number of expected civilian casualties, nor is 'Lavender' a database of approved targets but rather an intelligence aid. The military also refuted the notion that a warning of evacuation permits attacks with disregard for remaining civilians, and asserted that the IDF investigates the outcomes of its strikes, including unintended civilian harm, to learn lessons, contrary to the film's claims.

The IDF spokesperson criticized the filmmakers for omitting crucial context, such as the security reasons for operations in Gaza, Hamas's deliberate embedding within the civilian population, and the extensive measures the IDF takes to minimize civilian harm, including pre-attack warnings, munition selection, humanitarian aid support, and the cancellation of attacks to protect civilians. The IDF argued that the film's manipulative editing and comparisons to historical atrocities falsely attribute malicious intent to the IDF, misrepresenting the professional term 'collateral damage' as indifference.

The IDF maintained that its rigorous assessment of potential civilian harm is a requirement under international law, used to ensure attack legality and implement precautions. While acknowledging the moral weight carried by commanders and soldiers in decisions that may result in civilian casualties, the IDF stated this burden reflects the seriousness of the decisions, not illegality or indifference. The IDF concluded by stating it operates humanely, despite the filmmakers' efforts to conceal this, and remains open to constructive criticism based on facts, while noting the filmmakers did not submit their claims for IDF review before publication.