The Israeli military campaign in Gaza has entered a baldly new phase—one not defined so much by sheer firepower, but by a methodical, technologically facilitated process that organizes targets as well as civilian impact. New to this campaign is the degree to which the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have expanded what they consider “acceptable” civilian risk, paired with the use of advanced artificial intelligence systems that accelerate and multiply strikes.
Since combat began following Hamas’s assault on southern Israel on October 7, the IDF has expanded its definition of legitimate military targets. The focus has shifted from purely tactical targets—weapons caches, rocket launchers, and armed agents—to what the army calls “power targets.” These include residential skyscrapers, public buildings, universities, banks, and government ministries. The locations have frequently been selected less with an urgent military necessity and more to cause societal shock, the aim being to pressure civilians into resisting Hamas.
This practice draws on the so-called Dahiya Doctrine, which advocates for the use of disproportionate force against civilian and government targets in a bid to bring about deterrence. Though aspects of this doctrine have appeared in earlier operations, the current conflict represents an unprecedented level of escalation. Reports indicate that the combination of enhanced targeting powers, relaxed civilian casualty thresholds, and access to AI systems capable of creating vast quantities of potential targets has created a level of destruction never before experienced. At the center of this system is the Habsora AI platform, which processes huge volumes of intelligence to provide hundreds of target suggestions every day.
These are most often private residences where suspected Hamas operators live, occasionally of comparatively low rank. The system design is quantity-based: human oversight is low, and officers are graded based on how many targets they generate as opposed to their strategic value. It has been labeled a “mass assassination factory” by past intelligence officials, where volume trumps accuracy. The cost in human lives is appalling.
Currently, IDF strikes are approved at locations where civilian deaths will be anticipated and will be acceptable. Previously, such operations would have been subjected to far more stringent calculations in order to contain collateral damage. Currently, strikes are approved in instances where they would result in the deaths of dozens or hundreds of civilians if the targeted location is deemed to be important enough. In some reported cases, the military leadership gladly sacrificed heavy civilian casualties to assassinate a single senior official.
The statistics speak the grim tale. Tens of thousands have died and several more have been wounded, with women and children constituting a majority of the dead, local Gazan health officials said. Over a million citizens have been displaced, and countless families have lost multiple members in a single attack. Even so-called “safe areas” have not remained out of harm’s way, with residential buildings and shelters coming under random attacks, taking whole families with them. Individual accounts record the depth of human tragedy behind these statistics.
One such survivor, a young woman named Nour, recounted how she lost her entire family in a single airstrike while she survived by chance. Another child, Noor, had survived only because a family feud had positioned him some meters away from his parents and siblings when one strike fell. These are not random events—but a known pattern in which civilian life is in the crosshairs, and quite intentionally so. Psychological trauma is long-term.
Scientific research shows that exposure to this amount of conflict has the potential to cause post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in up to half of the affected civilians, and Gaza’s residents likely experience even higher levels of trauma considering the sheer magnitude of atrocities they endure daily and the total loss of control over their lives. Children are particularly vulnerable, threatened with anxiety, depression, chronic illness, and a lifetime of psychological harm.
Trauma is not only individual but also intergenerational, passing through social as well as biological channels, and the effects of this war will be felt for decades to come. Efforts to address these mental health requirements are hindered by the devastation of hospitals, the absence of trained staff, and pervasive violence. While community treatment programs and telemedicine provide some solace, the scale of the problem vastly outstrips the resources available, with large segments of the population without effective care.
Strategically, the Gaza war of Israel is a watershed shift in the use of airpower and intelligence. Introducing AI into target evaluation, easing limitations on civilian casualties, and deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure are a departure from previous norms of proportionality in war. While the stated aim is to drive out Hamas combatants, the operational impact has been the destruction of Palestinian society on a mass scale, with little evidence of a substantial reduction of Hamas’ military capabilities.
The lessons extend beyond this war. Gaza demonstrates the possibility of advanced technologies, including AI, to make possible operations creating vast numbers of civilian casualties and redrawing the moral and legal lines of war. Questions of city warfare, the role of autonomous targeting, and accountability for civilian harm are urgent and deep. The world is watching and the Gaza lessons will inform military tactics, ethics, and international debate on how to fight war for decades to come.