An Israeli Documentary Touches A Raw Nerve

Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor should not be surprised that their controversial documentary, NAZA, has been vociferously condemned by mainstream Israeli leaders.

NAZ, which premiered at the recent Venice International Film Festival, claims that Israel loosened its rules of engagement in responding to Hamas’ terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. Israel thereby caused the deaths of numerous Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. It contends that Israeli forces, in using artificial intelligence, were ready to accept a high Palestinian civilian death toll in targeting Hamas terrorists.

At a time when Israel has been accused of war crimes and genocide, this film has touched a raw nerve in Israel because Israelis regard themselves as the victims of aggression on October 7.

NAZA, a Hebrew acronym for collateral damage, was co-produced by The Guardian, a left-of-center British daily that has been critical of Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

It is ironic that this newspaper has become the bane of Israel. Charles Prestwich (CP) Scott, its editor from 1872 until 1929, was an important supporter of Zionism. He had a close relationship with Chaim Weizmann, a leading figure in the Zionist movement who played a major role in the momentous decision by the British government to issue the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which endorsed a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

In the 80-minute film, 24 unidentified interviewees described as Israeli intelligence officers and soldiers discussed “the systems behind Israel’s calculated mass killing” of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

It should be noted that Abraham and Szor are not new to this field of commentary. They participated in the production of No Other Land, a documentary about the Israeli destruction of Palestinian residential homes in the West Bank village of Masafer Yatta. The film had its premiere at the Berlin International Film Festival and won the 2024 Academy Award for best documentary feature.

As expected, NAZA received a rapturous 25-minute standing ovation in Venice. Since the Gaza war, Israel’s image has taken a drubbing. One can assume that many members of the audience were predisposed toward the Palestinian point of view.

Although the film has yet to be publicly screened in Israel, the backlash in Israel was immediate.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he would introduce two bills to punish those who slander the Israeli armed forces.

Culture Minister Miki Zohar, having floated the possibility of revoking the citizenship of the filmmakers, accused Abraham and Szor of  “breaching their loyalty to the state and collaborating with the enemy.”

President Isaac Herzog blasted the movie as “a shame and a disgrace,” but said that the revocation of their citizenship “has no chance.”

Gadi Eisenkot, the former chief of staff of the armed forces who is running for the premiership in the October 27 general election, denounced NAZA. He said it is detached from reality, exhibits “moral blindness,” and smears “the good name of our soldiers in order to reap applause at festivals abroad.”

The current chief of staff, General Eyal Zamir, said it traffics in “blood libels” and suggested that Abraham and Szor may have released classified materials.

Avigdor Liberman, the leader of the Yisrael Beytenu Party, accused the filmmakers of turning the October 7 massacre into “a spectacle of slander” against Israel, the Israel Defense Forces, and “our magnificent fighters.” Claiming they represented a small minority in Israel, he said they were willing to “sell their country.”

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir lambasted it as “antisemitic” and said that the directors had caused “direct damage to the people of Israel.”

Abraham, in a video statement, said that Israelis should be aware of the details of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, which resulted in the deaths of roughly 73,000 Palestinians, including about 24,000 Palestinian combatants, and the demolition of thousands of buildings.

The Guardian said that NAZA was based on more than three years of investigative journalism, and that it would “robustly defend” NAZA from “any attacks or attempts at censorship.”

What The Guardian misses in its ardent defense of the film is elementary. The depth of the atrocity perpetrated by Hamas on October 7 was so profound that it merited a ferocious response from Israel. It is possible that, as The New York Times points out, Israel “severely weakened its system of safeguards meant to protect civilians.”

Hamas, however, bears much of the fault. Huge numbers of Palestinian civilians were killed largely because they were cynically used by Hamas as human shields. Hamas, a pro-Iranian organization that categorical rejects Israel’s very existence, deliberately exploited the high number of Palestinian civilian casualties to score points in the international community. In this respect, Hamas succeeded.

Not having seen NAZA, I am no position to critically assess its qualities from a cinematic or a moral point of view. But if it unfairly tarnishes Israel’s reputation, or compromises its security, Abraham and Szor have a lot to answer for.

In the meantime, the Israeli government should distance itself from rash comments by Netanyahu and Zohar that the citizenship of the filmmakers may be revoked.

Four years ago, the Supreme Court in Israel ruled that the state can revoke the citizenship of a person who commits terrorist attacks or whose actions amount to treason. Since Abraham and Szor do not appear to have committed either of these crimes, the Israeli government should be careful. Israel should not rush to hasty and premature judgments.

In a democracy, people are presumed to be innocent rather than guilty before a verdict is rendered. Israel should accordingly in this case.