The documentary NAZA says Israel’s military has woven artificial-intelligence algorithms into its Gaza-war targeting chain, sparking a global debate over autonomous weapons in densely populated battlefields. Built on testimony from 24 current or former Israeli intelligence officers and soldiers, the film opened to a 25-minute standing ovation in Venice, underscoring the worldwide attention it has drawn.
How the film says AI entered the targeting loop
Directors Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor—Oscar winners from a previous project—lay out a chain of digital tools that, they argue, turn raw data into lethal strikes. Insiders say AI models sift through satellite imagery, drone feeds, and intercepted mobile traffic to flag “low-ranking” Hamas operatives. The model then spits out specific coordinates, often residential houses, for a night-time airstrike.
The interviewees describe a parallel surveillance operation that hacks personal mobile phones to locate individuals. One soldier recounts hearing a private conversation between a target and a family member just minutes before a missile launched. The film suggests that, while the Israeli military publicly insists a human always “presses the red button,” algorithmic outputs heavily guide the decision-making, effectively turning data into a trigger for mass destruction.
NAZA is presented as an internal Israeli shorthand for civilian casualties—men, women and children. To protect their identities, participants appear with digitally altered voices and faces, yet they describe systematic demolition of whole neighborhoods, including food-distribution sites, and the killing of non-combatants caught in the strike zone.
A secret unit and the claim of “thwarting peace”
One testimony comes from a clandestine intelligence unit that reports directly to the prime minister. A member alleges the unit’s explicit mission was to “thwart peace,” implying goals that stretch beyond tactical engagement to a broader strategy of regional destabilisation. The filmmakers capture a spectrum of reactions: some soldiers speak of deep remorse, while others show chilling indifference or even pride in the system’s efficiency.
The broader context of the Gaza conflict
The Gaza Strip, home to roughly two million people, has endured intense bombardment for months. Humanitarian organisations have repeatedly condemned the civilian toll. NAZA adds a new layer to the controversy by arguing that the technology enabling rapid, precise strikes also raises the risk of civilian harm when algorithms prioritize target elimination over collateral mitigation.
The film arrives as the international community wrestles with how existing laws of armed conflict apply to AI-driven weaponry. The United Nations and several NGOs have called for clearer “human-in-the-loop” standards, warning that delegating lethal decisions to machines erodes accountability. Israel maintains that every strike requires final human authorisation, a stance the documentary challenges by highlighting the AI system’s role in pre-selection and narrowing of targets.
What the allegations mean for India
- Strategic autonomy in AI warfare – India is accelerating its own AI-enabled defence programmes. The NAZA revelations provide a cautionary case study, prompting policymakers to embed strong human-in-the-loop safeguards before fielding similar systems.
- Diplomatic balancing act – New Delhi’s defence partnership with Israel remains strong, yet the country also upholds a long-standing position on Palestinian rights. The documentary increases pressure on Indian officials to reconcile these sometimes-conflicting priorities in bilateral talks and multilateral forums.
- Global norm-setting – As a major exporter of defence technology, India will likely be called upon in future UN deliberations on AI weapon regulation. The film underscores the urgency of shaping rules that prevent autonomous systems from bypassing established protections for civilians.
Counter-arguments and the limits of the evidence
Israeli officials have not disputed the presence of AI tools but stress that they are merely decision-support aids. They argue that the speed of modern combat, especially in urban environments where combatants blend with civilians, demands rapid data processing that no human could achieve unaided. The “human-in-the-loop” claim, they say, keeps legal and moral responsibility with the commander who authorises each strike.
Krytycy zauważają, że uczestnicy są anonimowi, a film nie przedstawia dzienników operacyjnych ani niezależnych audytów technicznych. Bez takiego potwierdzenia niektórzy obserwatorzy przestrzegają przed wyciąganiem ostatecznych wniosków na temat stopnia automatyzacji lub intencji stojących za konkretnymi uderzeniami.
Co warto śledzić dalej
- Dochodzenia – Grupy zajmujące się prawami człowieka zapowiedziały plany wystąpienia o dostęp do odpowiednich dzienników wojskowych. To, czy Izrael wyrazi zgodę na taką kontrolę, pozostaje niepewne.
- Wyzwania prawne – Międzynarodowy Trybunał Karny może rozważyć, czy domniemane wykorzystanie celowania opartego na AI narusza zasadę rozróżniania, która zobowiązuje kombatantów do odróżniania cywilów od bojowników.
- Reakcje polityczne – Oczekuje się, że państwa rozwijające broń wspomaganą przez AI, w tym Indie, zwołają panele eksperckie w celu oceny implikacji etycznych i operacyjnych podkreślonych przez NAZA.
NAZA wymusza konfrontację z rzeczywistością, która niegdyś była wyobrażalna jedynie w science-fiction: technologia znajduje się obecnie w samym centrum codziennych działań wojennych. To, czy twierdzenia filmu przełożą się na konkretne zmiany w sposobie, w jaki świat reguluje wykorzystanie AI w walce, pozostaje nieznane, ale debata, którą wywołał, ukształtuje zasady prowadzenia działań wojennych dla przyszłego pokolenia konfliktów.