The Number Before the Bomb: How Technology Plays a Role in Targeting Gaza

Abu Dhabi, UAE – In conventional warfare, reaching a target relied on limited information and direct human decision-making. In Gaza, however, the picture has become far more complex; vast amounts of data, communications, aerial imagery, analysis systems, and algorithms all converge before a decision reaches the pilot or the firing unit. This system has become the subject of international investigations. Most recently, the film *NAZA* has raised a sensitive question: what happens to information regarding civilians once it enters the military decision-making chain?

“Lavender”… From Data to Goals

Investigations by *+972 Magazine* and *Local Call* examined the use of the “Lavender” system to process intelligence and classify individuals as potential targets. The Israeli military rejected the characterization of the system as an autonomous tool for making lethal decisions, asserting instead that digital systems assist analysts and that final decisions are subject to human review. However, the presence of human oversight does not resolve the issue; information generated by algorithms can influence prioritization and determine which individuals and locations undergo further scrutiny.

“Habsora”: Accelerating Information Production

The “Habsora” system has also featured in investigations regarding the digital infrastructure used for target identification. The fundamental concept is not that the system pulls the trigger, but rather that it can rapidly process vast amounts of data. It integrates information from multiple sources and converts it into outputs utilized by military analysts; in this context, data accuracy and the reliability of the classification process become critical factors determining the final outcome.

Tech Companies in the Midst of War

The Associated Press has revealed an expansion in the use of Microsoft cloud services and AI-related technologies within the Israeli military since the outbreak of the war. According to the investigation, the volume of data stored on Microsoft servers exceeded 13.6 petabytes in July 2024. While this does not imply that technology companies are making military decisions, it highlights the significant role digital infrastructure has come to play in processing war-related information.

Civilians in the Decision-Making Equation

International humanitarian law mandates a distinction between civilians and military targets and requires that anticipated civilian casualties not be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage. All feasible precautions must be taken to minimize harm. Consequently, knowledge of the number of civilians present at a location—or the likelihood of their presence—must be part of the decision-making process. This brings to the fore the most sensitive issue raised by NAZA: how do estimates of civilian casualties factor into the decision prior to executing a strike?

“NAZA”… Testimonies from within the military establishment.

The film, which premiered at the 2026 Venice Film Festival, draws on the testimonies of 24 Israeli military and intelligence personnel. It presents an account of the use of digital systems to identify targets and estimate potential collateral damage, while Israel has rejected the allegations, describing them as misleading. Consequently, the testimonies alone are insufficient to prove the existence of a uniform protocol applicable to all operations; however, they open the door to examining specific cases where pre-strike intelligence can be compared with the actual outcomes on the ground.

Strikes Reveal the Gap

The Associated Press investigated ten Israeli strikes during the early months of the war that resulted in more than 500 deaths, examining images, geospatial data, and available information regarding the targeted sites. In some instances, the investigation found no visible evidence of a clear military target at the location prior to the attack. However, an absence of evidence in open-source material does not prove the absence of a target, as a significant portion of the intelligence used in military operations remains classified.

The Engineers’ Building… An Unresolved Question

On October 31, 2023, a strike on the Engineers’ Building in Gaza killed 106 civilians, including 54 children, according to a Human Rights Watch investigation. The investigation relied on interviews, photographs, videos, and satellite imagery, though it was unable to access the strike site. A crucial question remains: what information was available to the party carrying out the attack regarding the nature of the building and the presence of civilians prior to the strike?

When the error occurs

Following a 2024 strike that killed seven World Central Kitchen workers, Israel acknowledged errors in vehicle identification and coordination and announced disciplinary measures against two officers. The incident demonstrates that the presence of advanced systems and human oversight does not preclude fatal errors. However, assessing responsibility requires pinpointing where the error originated: in data collection, analysis, translation, review, or the final decision.

The real question

Open-source evidence does not prove that artificial intelligence independently made decisions to kill civilians in Gaza, but it does confirm the use of advanced digital systems to process data linked to military operations. It also highlights a genuine debate regarding the extent to which these tools influence target selection. Consequently, the most critical question following the “Lavender” (NAZA) revelations is not whether Israel employs artificial intelligence, but rather, what did the decision-maker know about the presence of civilians prior to the strike, and how did that information shape the final decision?