The British expert's response to the 'Naz'a' film: 'They are distorting the laws of war'

British international law expert, attorney Natasha Hausdorff, pushes back against the claims of the documentary film 'Naz'a', asserting that its creators distort the laws of armed conflict. She argues that pre-calculating potential civilian harm is a legal obligation, not evidence of intent to kill. The IDF also rejects the film's conclusions, which are based on anonymous testimonies.

British international law expert, attorney Natasha Hausdorff, pushes back against the claims of the documentary film 'Naz'a', asserting that its creators distort the laws of armed conflict and present lawful procedures and military precautions as criminal intent. The film, directed by Yuval Abraham and Rachel Shor, features testimonies from 24 former military and intelligence personnel and alleges that Israel uses artificial intelligence for target selection and conducts systematic, intentional killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Hausdorff, the legal director of the UKLFI organization, explains that the very fact that the IDF estimates in advance how many civilians might be harmed does not indicate an intent to harm them, and that the laws of war require assessments of civilian casualties. She emphasizes that this is a common practice in other Western militaries, including the United States and NATO countries. The expert points to the problematic nature of relying on anonymous witnesses, noting that even if a particular attack turns out to be unlawful, that does not prove a systematic policy of an entire army. The IDF also rejects the film's conclusions, including the claim that an attack was approved in which 500 civilians were expected to be killed.