‘NAZA’ Co-Director Yuval Abraham Calls Out the U.S. Government for ‘Funding’ Israel’s Destruction of Gaza, Telling NYFF Audience: ‘This Is What Your Country Is Supporting’
The Gaza documentary "NAZA" premiered at the New York Film Festival to a standing ovation, with co-director Yuval Abraham addressing the audience about United States funding and military support to Israel being used in Gaza. Abraham argued that American taxpayers should be aware of what their government is supporting, stating that part of the film's purpose is to make denial of events in Gaza more difficult. The documentary previously premiered at the Venice Film Festival, where it won a special jury prize and received a record-breaking 24.5-minute standing ovation, and will now be released across more than 50 territories before becoming free to stream on The Guardian's website.
Since its debut, the film has provoked strong responses from Israeli officials and pro-Israel groups. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed legislation to revoke citizenship for those who "slander" Israeli Defence Forces soldiers, whilst the Minister of Culture threatened to revoke the filmmakers' citizenship. The Israeli-American Council organised a 50-person protest outside the festival screening, labelling the documentary "anti-Israel" and claiming it ignores contradictory evidence about IDF conduct. Abraham acknowledged during the Q&A that the October 7 massacre was "completely unjustified," but questioned whether it could justify the scale of civilian deaths that followed in Gaza.
- Gaza documentary "NAZA" premieres at New York Film Festival criticising US military support for Israel
- Israeli officials threaten filmmakers with citizenship revocation in response
- Abraham disputes whether October 7 justifies the civilian toll in Gaza
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The documentary serves a vital democratic function by making transparent what U.S. military aid to Israel actually enables on the ground in Gaza. American taxpayers have a legitimate right to understand the material consequences of their government's foreign aid commitments, particularly regarding civilian harm. Whilst Israel's security concerns are real and October 7 was indeed unjustified, the scale of civilian casualties raises profound questions about proportionality and necessity that deserve public scrutiny rather than obscurity. Bearing witness to suffering and demanding accountability for what aid enables is not propaganda but essential journalistic work.
The case against
Israel faces genuine existential security threats and has a legitimate right to defend its population, a need that justifies military support from allied democracies. A documentary that foregrounds Palestinian civilian harm without adequately presenting Israel's perspective on how it minimises civilian casualties, its security rationale, or the context of October 7 presents an incomplete picture that skews public understanding. The framing positions the documentary's moral critique as objective fact rather than one interpretation of a genuinely complex situation where reasonable people, including Israeli peaceniks, disagree about proportionality. Selective presentation that ignores contradictory evidence or Israel's own internal debates about conduct constrains rather than expands genuine understanding.