Who will tell the story of Gaza after the war?
Graduates of the Faculty of Medicine at the Islamic University of Gaza lit up their phones during their recent graduation ceremony. There were no hall lights, as medical students are accustomed to; instead, young faces held their diplomas and small lights, just enough for everyone to see one another. These students were in their third year when the war began, and they continued their education amid displacement and a lack of resources until they reached graduation day. At first glance, the image appears to express resilience, but it raises a deeper question: How does Gaza begin to think about the future while the files of the war remain open and actual recovery has not yet begun?
At this moment, the Israeli film “NAZA” emerges. Directed by journalists Yuval Abraham and Rachel Zor, the film relies on testimonies from Israeli soldiers and intelligence personnel regarding targeting operations in Gaza. It presents a narrative that contradicts the Israeli military establishment’s claims about managing civilian casualties. However, the film’s significance lies in the reaction it provoked. The debate moved inside Israel itself. Netanyahu announced his intention to push for legislation increasing penalties related to defamation of soldiers, while legal actions against the film’s makers were considered. Meanwhile, Israeli journalists, artists, and organizations defended their right to screen it.
On the other side of the Israeli media landscape is Channel 14, which represents a completely different approach to covering the war. Le Monde documented statements broadcast by the channel, which Israeli organizations deemed incitement against Palestinians. The channel rejected these accusations, viewing them as a political attempt to target right-wing media.
Between “NAZA” and Channel 14, a media arena emerges where different narratives about the war, the limits of criticizing the army, and the boundaries of discourse toward Palestinians are contested. But the problem extends beyond Israel. Last April, more than twenty global media organizations, including the Associated Press, BBC, CNN, Reuters, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, called for allowing foreign journalists independent access to Gaza. The organizations stated that fieldwork is essential to verify official narratives and witness the war’s effects directly.
This makes the question even more urgent: If the narrative itself is contested, who will tell Gaza’s story after the war ends? A ceasefire does not mean the end of the war’s consequences. A joint assessment by the United Nations, the European Union, and the World Bank estimated recovery and reconstruction needs at approximately $71.4 billion over ten years, with more than 371,000 residential units damaged or destroyed, over half of hospitals out of service, and most schools damaged or destroyed.
Reality is even harsher: days ago, a war-damaged building in Gaza collapsed, killing 21 people. Families were living in it despite its danger because safe alternatives were limited, while major reconstruction remains stalled months after the ceasefire. Therefore, the question about Gaza concerns whether normal life can be restored atop this destruction.
