I read and write well, the rest follows.
What NAZA reminds us about listening to soldiers
A year and a half ago, I wrote about the right and responsibility of Israeli citizens to know what is being done in our name. I wrote with gratitude to the journalists who help make that right possible. Since then, everything I have seen has only strengthened that conviction.
Read “My Resistance Response to Gaslighting” by Galia Nezhinsky: https://medium.com/@
On October 1, 2026, the IDF issued a detailed response to the film NAZA and the reporting surrounding it. I found the document significant, not because it settles the questions raised by the film, but because it describes investigations, operational debriefs and changes the IDF says it made. Those processes, and their results, deserve further scrutiny. The IDF disputes the film’s account and challenges its reporting. The filmmakers present testimony from soldiers. Both the testimony and the IDF’s response should be examined carefully.
The Guardian’s account of the filmmakers’ response to the IDF statement: https://www.theguardian.com/
The IDF statement is explicit on one point that matters enormously to me. It says that the idea that there are “no uninvolved civilians in Gaza” “does not represent in any way the approach of the IDF and its commanders, its binding directives, or its activity to mitigate harm to civilians throughout the war.” It also says that distinguishing between military operatives and civilians is fundamental to the IDF and its binding directives.
This is consistent with the IDF’s stated value of “Purity of Arms”: “The soldier will not use their weapon or power to harm uninvolved civilians and prisoners and will do everything in their power to prevent harm to their lives, bodies, dignity and property.” The existence of this principle does not show that it is always upheld in practice. Reaffirming it is not the same as demonstrating that it has been followed. It is especially important to repeat these words now, when war makes the effort to uphold them, and the consequences when they are not upheld, impossible to treat as abstract.
The Spirit of the IDF: https://www.idf.il/en/mini-
A strong army is strong enough to look directly at failures and wrongdoing within its own ranks, investigate them, learn from them and make changes to help prevent them from recurring. In its response, the IDF says that reports of civilian harm prompted operational debriefs into hundreds of incidents. It also says that lessons were implemented and additional instructions issued following civilian deaths near aid-distribution centers. The statement does not establish whether those measures prevented later harm or how effective they were, and those remain important questions.
Morale and discipline can erode in an army without sustained effort to protect them, even in peacetime and all the more so during war. If this kind of investigative journalism helped save even a few Palestinian civilians’ lives, prevent violations or clarify the boundaries of acceptable conduct, it was worth pursuing. The IDF’s statement does not establish all those outcomes. It makes the questions about what changed and whether it worked all the more important.
I cannot imagine what it would mean for our soldiers if journalists did not give them a space in which they could be heard. Some may exploit these testimonies in bad faith, but that risk is not a reason to silence them. It is a reason to report them carefully and with context, so that we can hear these voices within our own country and share, at least in some measure, the trauma and pain behind them.
For now, some of the soldiers who appear in these reports have no other way to speak except anonymously. That does not make their voices less important. It makes our responsibility to listen even greater.
Articles by Yuval Abraham based on materials included in NAZA: https://www.972mag.com/writer/