An investigation has revealed that the IDF dramatically changed its rules of engagement and restrictions on targeting civilians in Gaza immediately following Hamas' terror attack on October 7, 2023, the New York Times reported on Thursday. The shift led to what has been described as one of the most intense bombing campaigns in modern warfare.
According to the investigation, at exactly 1:00 p.m. on October 7, 2023, for the first time in the history of conflicts with Hamas, a senior IDF command issued an order granting mid-ranking officers extensive authorization to target thousands of locations in Gaza.
These included lower-priority Hamas operatives who had not been high-value targets in previous operations. Under these orders, officers were allowed to approve strikes that could risk the lives of up to 20 civilians — significantly more than the restrictions that had previously been in place.
Most strikes in past operations were only approved after officers determined there would be no civilian casualties. In some cases, up to five civilian casualties were permitted and rarely was the threshold raised to 10 or more.
According to a senior IDF officer interviewed by the newspaper, the military changed its engagement rules because it believed Israel faced an existential threat during the initial hours of Hamas' surprise attack which resulted in the massacre of 1,200 Israelis and the kidnapping of 250 others to Gaza. This was while terrorists were still present inside Israel.
The senior officer said it was imperative to exert significant force to neutralize the threat, executing thousands of strikes in a short time. This necessitated decentralizing strike authorization, typically reserved for senior command.
These critical hours were further complicated by the looming fear of a potential Hezbollah invasion from Lebanon, which required the IDF to divert considerable forces to that front.
The investigation claimed that in its effort to dismantle Hamas' capabilities in Gaza, Israel significantly weakened oversight mechanisms meant to prevent harm to civilians. It adopted "flawed" methods for identifying targets and assessing risks to innocents, ignored warnings from IDF officers and U.S. officials about deficiencies and failed to conduct thorough post-strike investigations or punish wrongdoers.
The paper noted that its findings were based on the review of dozens of military documents and interviews with over 100 soldiers and other sources, including over 25 individuals involved in strike approvals.
The report said that in order to significantly expand the target pool in Gaza — part of the pledge to counter the attack on Israel and destroy Hamas — the number of Palestinian civilians who could be endangered in each strike was also increased.
The outcome, according to the investigation, was the IDF dropping nearly 30,000 bombs and munitions on Gaza — more than the total used in the next eight months combined. The investigation found that another order issued by IDF command at 10:50 p.m. on October 8 indicated the scale of civilian casualties deemed acceptable during those early days of the war.
According to the order, strikes on military targets in Gaza could cumulatively risk the lives of up to 500 civilians daily. This limit was reportedly removed two days later, allowing officers to approve an unlimited number of strikes they deemed lawful.
A 500 casualty limit: precaution or quota?
IDF sources told the outlet that the removed restriction was actually a precaution meant to limit the number of strikes per day. However, Prof. Michael N. Schmitt of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, argued that mid-level officers might have interpreted it as a "quota" of permissible civilian deaths per day.
Following the limit’s removal, Hamas-controlled authorities in Gaza often reported daily death tolls exceeding 500, though it remains unclear how many were civilians, terrorists or casualties from previous days.
The investigation highlighted Shaldan al-Najjar, a senior Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorist, as an example. During Operation Protective Edge in 2014, the IDF reportedly took numerous precautions to keep civilians away from his house before attacking it.
These included calls to neighbors warning of the impending strike and implementing the "roof knock" procedure, commonly used before targeting buildings suspected of containing weapons or tunnel entrances.
As a result, everyone, including al-Najjar himself, evacuated with no casualties. However, when the IDF targeted a house he visited on October 10, 2023, no prior warnings were issued. The strike killed al-Najjar along with 20 of his extended family members, including children and a two-month-old baby.
In some cases targeting Hamas leaders, senior IDF officers approved strikes knowing they could endanger over 100 civilians each — actions the outlet described as " crossing an extraordinary threshold for a modern Western military.”
The IDF reportedly conducted strikes at such a rapid pace that the pre-war target bank was depleted within days. As a result, the military adopted a new and "unproven" system for identifying targets, relying on artificial intelligence heavily.
According to the report, a system called "The Gospel" was used to cross-reference information from various sources, including phone calls, satellite imagery and cellular tracking. The IDF also maintains extensive databases, one of which is known as "Lavender," containing phone numbers and addresses of suspected terrorists.
A chaotic mood
Israel's control over Gaza's communication networks allowed for the monitoring and tracking of Palestinian phones. However, six IDF officers told the outlet that these databases sometimes contained outdated information, increasing the risk of misidentifying civilians as terrorists.
The investigation further alleged that the IDF frequently relied on a simplistic statistical model to assess risks to innocents during strikes. Sometimes targets were bombed just hours after being identified, allegedly increasing the likelihood of errors.
The model mainly estimated risks based on cellular activity in broad areas near strike zones rather than detailed intelligence tracking of specific structures as was customary in previous Israeli operations.
The IDF’s air campaign was most intense during the initial weeks of the war. Palestinians claim that 15,000 people were killed in the first two months — a figure reported by Gaza's Hamas-controlled Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and terrorists and has faced skepticism over its data.
Regardless, amid international outrage during that period, the IDF reportedly reduced its use of bombs from November 2023 onward to conserve munitions and tightened strike protocols, including halving the number of civilians allowed to be endangered in low-priority strikes.
Despite this, the death toll in Gaza continued to rise, with Palestinians claiming over 45,000 fatalities to date.
The dramatic and extensive investigation comes as Israel faces allegations of genocide in Gaza, including a petition filed against it by South Africa in the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
Israeli strike in Gaza
Israel firmly denies these accusations, stressing its compliance with international law and its efforts to minimize civilian harm, such as mass evacuation orders for entire cities, leaflets dropped from the air and warnings via social media.
Israeli officials frequently highlight Hamas and other terror groups' use of civilians as human shields, embedding terrorists and weaponry in residential buildings and hospitals.
According to the outlet, IDF officers must ensure that the risks posed by airstrikes are "proportional" to the military value of the target and take feasible precautions to protect innocent lives under international law.
However, the investigation stressed that officers have considerable discretion because the rules of warfare are ambiguous regarding what constitutes a feasible precaution.
The report, citing about a dozen sources who spoke to the New York Times, claimed that some IDF officers involved in the bombing campaign became far less stringent about adhering to military protocols after the shock of the October 7 massacre.
While some commanders worked hard to maintain compliance, five senior officers reportedly described the mood in the military using the term "harbu darbu” (A Hebrew slang expression coined from the Arab harb wadarb: Battles and war).
The outlet noted it received a 700-word response from the IDF and included excerpts of it alongside interviews with senior officials to understand the policies. The IDF confirmed that the rules for approving strikes changed after October 7 but stressed that its forces have "consistently been employing means and methods that adhere to the law."
Get the Ynetnews app on your smartphone: Google Play: https://bit.ly/4eJ37pE | Apple App Store: https://bit.ly/3ZL7iNv
IDF officials explained that the changes to strike protocols were made in the context of an "unprecedented and hardly comparable to other theaters of hostilities worldwide."
The response cited the massive scale of Hamas' deadly terror attack, the terrorists’ use of civilians as human shields and the extensive tunnel network as factors influencing military target selection and the ability to take various precautions before strikes.