UN report lists companies complicit in Israel's ‘genocide': Who are they?
Francesca Albanese's latest report, which is scheduled to be presented at a news conference in Geneva on Thursday, names 48 corporate actors, including United States tech giants Microsoft, Alphabet Inc. – Google's parent company – and Amazon. A database of more than 1000 corporate entities was also put together as part of the investigation.
'[Israel's] forever-occupation has become the ideal testing ground for arms manufacturers and Big Tech – providing significant supply and demand, little oversight, and zero accountability – while investors and private and public institutions profit freely,' the report said.
'Companies are no longer merely implicated in occupation – they may be embedded in an economy of genocide,' it said, in a reference to Israel's ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip. In an expert opinion last year, Albanese said there were 'reasonable grounds' to believe Israel was committing genocide in the besieged Palestinian enclave.
The report stated that its findings illustrate 'why Israel's genocide continues'.
'Because it is lucrative for many,' it said.
What arms and tech companies were identified in the report?
Israel's procurement of F-35 fighter jets is part of the world's largest arms procurement programme, relying on at least 1,600 companies across eight nations. It is led by US-based Lockheed Martin, but F-35 components are constructed globally.
Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A is listed as a main contributor in the military sector, while Japan's FANUC Corporation provides robotic machinery for weapons production lines.
The tech sector, meanwhile, has enabled the collection, storage and governmental use of biometric data on Palestinians, 'supporting Israel's discriminatory permit regime', the report said. Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon grant Israel 'virtually government-wide access to their cloud and AI technologies', enhancing its data processing and surveillance capacities.
The US tech company IBM has also been responsible for training military and intelligence personnel, as well as managing the central database of Israel's Population, Immigration and Borders Authority (PIBA) that stores the biometric data of Palestinians, the report said.
It found US software platform Palantir Technologies expanded its support to the Israeli military since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023. The report said there were 'reasonable grounds' to believe the company provided automatic predictive policing technology used for automated decision-making in the battlefield, to process data and generate lists of targets including through artificial intelligence systems like 'Lavender', 'Gospel' and 'Where's Daddy?'
What other companies are identified in the report?
The report also lists several companies developing civilian technologies that serve as 'dual-use tools' for Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory.
These include Caterpillar, Leonardo-owned Rada Electronic Industries, South Korea's HD Hyundai and Sweden's Volvo Group, which provide heavy machinery for home demolitions and the development of illegal settlements in the West Bank.
Rental platforms Booking and Airbnb also aid illegal settlements by listing properties and hotel rooms in Israeli-occupied territory.
The report named the US's Drummond Company and Switzerland's Glencore as the primary suppliers of coal for electricity to Israel, originating primarily from Colombia.
In the agriculture sector, Chinese Bright Dairy & Food is a majority owner of Tnuva, Israel's largest food conglomerate, which benefits from land seized from Palestinians in Israel's illegal outposts. Netafim, a company providing drip irrigation technology that is 80-percent owned by Mexico's Orbia Advance Corporation, provides infrastructure to exploit water resources in the occupied West Bank.
Treasury bonds have also played a critical role in funding the ongoing war on Gaza, according to the report, with some of the world's largest banks, including France's BNP Paribas and the UK's Barclays, listed as having stepped in to allow Israel to contain the interest rate premium despite a credit downgrade.
Who are the main investors behind these companies?
The report identified US multinational investment companies BlackRock and Vanguard as the main investors behind several listed companies.
BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, is listed as the second largest institutional investor in Palantir (8.6 percent), Microsoft (7.8 percent), Amazon (6.6 percent), Alphabet (6.6 percent) and IBM (8.6 per cent), and the third largest in Lockheed Martin (7.2 percent) and Caterpillar (7.5 percent).
Vanguard, the world's second-largest asset manager, is the largest institutional investor in Caterpillar (9.8 percent), Chevron (8.9 percent) and Palantir (9.1 percent), and the second largest in Lockheed Martin (9.2 percent) and Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems (2 percent).
Are companies profiting from dealing with Israel?
The report states that 'colonial endeavours and their associated genocides have historically been driven and enabled by the corporate sector.' Israel's expansion on Palestinian land is one example of 'colonial racial capitalism', where corporate entities profit from an illegal occupation.
Since Israel launched its war on Gaza in October 2023, 'entities that previously enabled and profited from Palestinian elimination and erasure within the economy of occupation, instead of disengaging are now involved in the economy of genocide,' the report said.
For foreign arms companies, the war has been a lucrative venture. Israel's military spending from 2023 to 2024 surged 65 percent, amounting to $46.5bn – one of the highest per capita worldwide.
Several entities listed on the exchange market – particularly in the arms, tech and infrastructure sectors – have seen their profits rise since October 2023. The Tel Aviv Stock Exchange also rose an unprecedented 179 percent, adding $157.9bn in market value.
Global insurance companies, including Allianz and AXA, invested large sums in shares and bonds linked to Israel's occupation, the report said, partly as capital reserves but primarily to generate returns.
Booking and Airbnb also continue to profit from rentals in Israeli-occupied land. Airbnb briefly delisted properties on illegal settlements in 2018 but later reverted to donating profits from such listings to humanitarian causes, a practice the report referred to as 'humanitarian-washing'.
Are private companies liable under international law?
According to Albanese's report, yes. Corporate entities are under an obligation to avoid violating human rights through direct action or in their business partnerships.
States have the primary responsibility to ensure that corporate entities respect human rights and must prevent, investigate and punish abuses by private actors. However, corporations must respect human rights even if the state where they operate does not.
A company must therefore assess whether activities or relationships throughout its supply chain risk causing human rights violations or contributing to them, according to the report.
The failure to act in line with international law may result in criminal liability. Individual executives can be held criminally liable, including before international courts.
The report called on companies to divest from all activities linked to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, which is illegal under international law.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion ruling that Israel's continued presence in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem should come to an end 'as rapidly as possible'. In light of this advisory opinion, the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel bring to an end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory by September 2025.
Albanese's report said the ICJ's ruling 'effectively qualifies the occupation as an act of aggression … Consequently, any dealings that support or sustain the occupation and its associated apparatus may amount to complicity in an international crime under the Rome Statute.
'States must not provide aid or assistance or enter into economic or trade dealings, and must take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that would assist in maintaining the illegal situation created by Israel in the oPt.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What Israel's attack on Iran means for the future of war
In the predawn darkness of June 13, Israel launched a 'preemptive' attack on Iran. Explosions rocked various parts of the country. Among the targets were nuclear sites at Natanz and Fordo, military bases, research labs, and senior military residences. By the end of the operation, Israel had killed at least 974 people while Iranian missile strikes in retaliation had killed 28 people in Israel. Israel described its actions as anticipatory self-defence, claiming Iran was mere weeks away from producing a functional nuclear weapon. Yet intelligence assessment, including by Israeli ally, the United States, and reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) showed no evidence of Tehran pursuing a nuclear weapon. At the same time, Iranian diplomats were in talks with US counterparts for a possible new nuclear deal. But beyond the military and geopolitical analysis, a serious ethical question looms: is it morally justifiable to launch such a devastating strike based not on what a state has done, but on what it might do in the future? What precedent does this set for the rest of the world? And who gets to decide when fear is enough to justify war? A dangerous moral gamble Ethicists and international lawyers draw a critical line between preemptive and preventive war. Pre-emption responds to an imminent threat – an immediate assault. Preventive war strikes against a possible future threat. Only the former meets moral criteria rooted in the philosophical works of thinkers like Augustine and Aquinas, and reaffirmed by modern theorists like Michael Walzer — echoing the so-called Caroline formula, which permits preemptive force only when a threat is 'instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation'. Israel's raid, however, fails this test. Iran's nuclear capability was not weeks from completion. Diplomacy had not been exhausted. And the devastation risked — including radioactive fallout from centrifuge halls — far exceeded military necessity. The law mirrors moral constraints. The UN Charter Article 2(4) bans the use of force, with the sole exception in Article 51, which permits self-defence after an armed attack. Israel's invocation of anticipatory self-defence relies on contested legal custom, not accepted treaty law. UN experts have called Israel's strike 'a blatant act of aggression' violating jus cogens norms. Such costly exceptions risk fracturing the international legal order. If one state can credibly claim pre-emption, others will too — from China reacting to patrols near Taiwan, to Pakistan reacting to perceived Indian posturing — undermining global stability. Israel's defenders respond that existential threats justify drastic action. Iran's leaders have a history of hostile rhetoric towards Israel and have consistently backed armed groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently argued that when a state's existence is under threat, international law struggles to provide clear, actionable answers. The historical scars are real. But philosophers warn that words, however hateful, do not equate to act. Rhetoric stands apart from action. If speech alone justified war, any nation could wage preemptive war based on hateful rhetoric. We risk entering a global 'state of nature', where every tense moment becomes cause for war. Technology rewrites the rules Technology tightens the squeeze on moral caution. The drones and F‑35s used in Rising Lion combined to paralyse Iran's defences within minutes. Nations once could rely on time to debate, persuade, and document. Hypersonic missiles and AI-powered drones have eroded that window — delivering a stark choice: act fast or lose your chance. These systems don't just shorten decision time — they dissolve the traditional boundary between wartime and peacetime. As drone surveillance and autonomous systems become embedded in everyday geopolitics, war risks becoming the default condition, and peace the exception. We begin to live not in a world of temporary crisis, but in what philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls a permanent state of exception — a condition where emergency justifies the suspension of norms, not occasionally but perpetually. In such a world, the very idea that states must publicly justify acts of violence begins to erode. Tactical advantage, coined as 'relative superiority', leverages this compressed timeframe — but gains ground at a cost. In an era where classified intelligence triggers near-instant reaction, ethical scrutiny retreats. Future first-move doctrines will reward speed over law, and surprise over proportion. If we lose the distinction between peace and war, we risk losing the principle that violence must always be justified — not assumed. The path back to restraint Without immediate course correction, the world risks a new norm: war before reason, fear before fact. The UN Charter depends on mutual trust that force remains exceptional. Every televised strike chips away at that trust, leading to arms races and reflexive attacks. To prevent this cascade of fear-driven conflict, several steps are essential. There has to be transparent verification: Claims of 'imminent threat' must be assessed by impartial entities — IAEA monitors, independent inquiry commissions — not buried inside secret dossiers. Diplomacy must take precedence: Talks, backchannels, sabotage, sanctions — all must be demonstrably exhausted pre-strike. Not optionally, not retroactively. There must be public assessment of civilian risk: Environmental and health experts must weigh in before military planners pull the trigger. The media, academia, and public must insist that these thresholds are met — and keep governments accountable. Preemptive war may, in rare cases, be morally justified — for instance, missiles poised on launchpads, fleets crossing redlines. But that bar is high by design. Israel's strike on Iran wasn't preventive, it was launched not against an unfolding attack but against a feared possibility. Institutionalising that fear as grounds for war is an invitation to perpetual conflict. If we abandon caution in the name of fear, we abandon the shared moral and legal boundaries that hold humanity together. Just war tradition demands we never view those who may harm us as mere threats — but rather as human beings, each worthy of careful consideration. The Iran–Israel war is more than military drama. It is a test: will the world still hold the line between justified self-defence and unbridled aggression? If the answer is no, then fear will not just kill soldiers. It will kill the fragile hope that restraint can keep us alive. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
6 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Israel kills 102 in Gaza as Trump says he will be ‘firm' with Netanyahu
Israeli forces have killed at least 102 Palestinians in attacks across the Gaza Strip, medical sources told Al Jazeera, even as United States President Donald Trump claimed that he would be 'very firm' with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on ending Israel's war on the Palestinian enclave. Israeli attacks on Tuesday destroyed clusters of homes in the north and south of Gaza, amid fears of yet another looming ground invasion. The attacks come ahead of a planned visit next week by Netanyahu to Washington, DC. Trump said on Tuesday that the Israeli prime minister wanted to end the war on Gaza, even as his forces ramp up attacks in Gaza. Among the Palestinians killed were 16 hungry aid seekers who died when Israeli soldiers attacked crowds at aid distribution hubs run by the controversial US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), according to medical sources. They are the latest victims in a wave of daily killings at these sites, which have killed nearly 600 Palestinians since GHF took over limited aid deliveries in Gaza in late May amid a crippling Israeli blockade. More than 170 major international charities and nongovernmental organisations have called for an immediate end to GHF, which rights groups say is operating in violation of international principles. 'Palestinians in Gaza face an impossible choice: starve or risk being shot while trying desperately to reach food to feed their families,' a joint statement read. GHF brings 'nothing but starvation and gunfire to the people of Gaza,' it added. Israeli forces also attacked Gaza City in the north, where it recently issued forced evacuation orders for residents of the area, which has already been bombarded into rubble. At least five people were killed when an Israeli quadcopter struck a gathering of people, local news agency Wafa reported. At least 82 percent of Gaza is now an Israeli-militarised zone or under forced displacement threats, according to the United Nations, warning people have nowhere to go. Ismail, a resident of the Sheikh Radwan suburb of Gaza City, said that newly displaced families were setting up tents in the road, after fleeing from areas north and east of the city and finding no other ground available. 'We don't sleep because of the sounds of explosions from tanks and planes. The occupation is destroying homes east of Gaza, in Jabalia and other places around us,' he said. 'Waiting room for death' In Khan Younis and its al-Mawasi area in the south, at least 12 Palestinians were killed when a home belonging to the al-Zanati family was targeted. Separately, a child was killed and several others wounded when an Israeli air strike struck a displacement camp. Several more were killed in an Israeli attack west of the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza, according to sources at al-Awda Hospital, while two others were killed and several wounded in a separate attack on a UN-run school sheltering displaced families in the al-Maghazi refugee camp. In a statement, the Israeli army said it attacked Gaza more than 140 times in the past 24 hours, claiming all those hit were 'terror targets' and 'militants'. The attacks come as hospitals in the devastated enclave struggle to cope with the influx of people amid a severe shortage of medical supplies and much-needed fuel. Al Jazeera's Hani Mahmoud, reporting from Gaza City, said critical services at the al-Shifa Hospital – which has come under attack and besieged several times throughout Israel's assault on Gaza – will soon come to a halt. 'Critical services at al-Shifa Hospital have either stopped or will stop in the coming hours as backup generators are running out of fuel,' Mahmoud said. 'This hospital was once the largest healthcare facility in Gaza, but has slowly turned into a waiting room for death, not just because of the war wounds, but because of a lack of fuel that keeps everything running,' he said. Hope for deal 'next week' The desperate situation in Gaza is increasing the pressure on world leaders to secure a deal that would end the war. Trump continues to maintain that a ceasefire deal is close, and that he hopes one will be secured 'sometime next week', during Netanyahu's White House visit. Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, a close Netanyahu ally, is in Washington this week for talks with senior officials on a Gaza ceasefire, Iran and other matters. Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri said pressure by Trump on Israel would be key to any breakthrough in stalled ceasefire efforts. 'We call upon the US administration to atone for its sin towards Gaza by declaring an end to the war,' he said. Al Jazeera's Hamdah Salhut, reporting from Amman, said there is 'cautious optimism' in Israel regarding a ceasefire. 'But there are still a lot of concerns, especially among family members of Israeli captives who have been calling for a deal,' Salhut said, adding that Netanyahu 'has never signalled he wants to end the war'. But Hamas has insisted it would not agree to any deal that does not include a full Israeli withdrawal from the Strip and a permanent halt to the war, which has so far killed more than 56,000 Palestinians since it began in October 2023.
Al Jazeera
7 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
UN report lists companies complicit in Israel's ‘genocide': Who are they?
The United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) has released a new report mapping the corporations aiding Israel in the displacement of Palestinians and its genocidal war on Gaza, in breach of international law. Francesca Albanese's latest report, which is scheduled to be presented at a news conference in Geneva on Thursday, names 48 corporate actors, including United States tech giants Microsoft, Alphabet Inc. – Google's parent company – and Amazon. A database of more than 1000 corporate entities was also put together as part of the investigation. '[Israel's] forever-occupation has become the ideal testing ground for arms manufacturers and Big Tech – providing significant supply and demand, little oversight, and zero accountability – while investors and private and public institutions profit freely,' the report said. 'Companies are no longer merely implicated in occupation – they may be embedded in an economy of genocide,' it said, in a reference to Israel's ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip. In an expert opinion last year, Albanese said there were 'reasonable grounds' to believe Israel was committing genocide in the besieged Palestinian enclave. The report stated that its findings illustrate 'why Israel's genocide continues'. 'Because it is lucrative for many,' it said. What arms and tech companies were identified in the report? Israel's procurement of F-35 fighter jets is part of the world's largest arms procurement programme, relying on at least 1,600 companies across eight nations. It is led by US-based Lockheed Martin, but F-35 components are constructed globally. Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A is listed as a main contributor in the military sector, while Japan's FANUC Corporation provides robotic machinery for weapons production lines. The tech sector, meanwhile, has enabled the collection, storage and governmental use of biometric data on Palestinians, 'supporting Israel's discriminatory permit regime', the report said. Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon grant Israel 'virtually government-wide access to their cloud and AI technologies', enhancing its data processing and surveillance capacities. The US tech company IBM has also been responsible for training military and intelligence personnel, as well as managing the central database of Israel's Population, Immigration and Borders Authority (PIBA) that stores the biometric data of Palestinians, the report said. It found US software platform Palantir Technologies expanded its support to the Israeli military since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023. The report said there were 'reasonable grounds' to believe the company provided automatic predictive policing technology used for automated decision-making in the battlefield, to process data and generate lists of targets including through artificial intelligence systems like 'Lavender', 'Gospel' and 'Where's Daddy?' What other companies are identified in the report? The report also lists several companies developing civilian technologies that serve as 'dual-use tools' for Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory. These include Caterpillar, Leonardo-owned Rada Electronic Industries, South Korea's HD Hyundai and Sweden's Volvo Group, which provide heavy machinery for home demolitions and the development of illegal settlements in the West Bank. Rental platforms Booking and Airbnb also aid illegal settlements by listing properties and hotel rooms in Israeli-occupied territory. The report named the US's Drummond Company and Switzerland's Glencore as the primary suppliers of coal for electricity to Israel, originating primarily from Colombia. In the agriculture sector, Chinese Bright Dairy & Food is a majority owner of Tnuva, Israel's largest food conglomerate, which benefits from land seized from Palestinians in Israel's illegal outposts. Netafim, a company providing drip irrigation technology that is 80-percent owned by Mexico's Orbia Advance Corporation, provides infrastructure to exploit water resources in the occupied West Bank. Treasury bonds have also played a critical role in funding the ongoing war on Gaza, according to the report, with some of the world's largest banks, including France's BNP Paribas and the UK's Barclays, listed as having stepped in to allow Israel to contain the interest rate premium despite a credit downgrade. Who are the main investors behind these companies? The report identified US multinational investment companies BlackRock and Vanguard as the main investors behind several listed companies. BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, is listed as the second largest institutional investor in Palantir (8.6 percent), Microsoft (7.8 percent), Amazon (6.6 percent), Alphabet (6.6 percent) and IBM (8.6 per cent), and the third largest in Lockheed Martin (7.2 percent) and Caterpillar (7.5 percent). Vanguard, the world's second-largest asset manager, is the largest institutional investor in Caterpillar (9.8 percent), Chevron (8.9 percent) and Palantir (9.1 percent), and the second largest in Lockheed Martin (9.2 percent) and Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems (2 percent). Are companies profiting from dealing with Israel? The report states that 'colonial endeavours and their associated genocides have historically been driven and enabled by the corporate sector.' Israel's expansion on Palestinian land is one example of 'colonial racial capitalism', where corporate entities profit from an illegal occupation. Since Israel launched its war on Gaza in October 2023, 'entities that previously enabled and profited from Palestinian elimination and erasure within the economy of occupation, instead of disengaging are now involved in the economy of genocide,' the report said. For foreign arms companies, the war has been a lucrative venture. Israel's military spending from 2023 to 2024 surged 65 percent, amounting to $46.5bn – one of the highest per capita worldwide. Several entities listed on the exchange market – particularly in the arms, tech and infrastructure sectors – have seen their profits rise since October 2023. The Tel Aviv Stock Exchange also rose an unprecedented 179 percent, adding $157.9bn in market value. Global insurance companies, including Allianz and AXA, invested large sums in shares and bonds linked to Israel's occupation, the report said, partly as capital reserves but primarily to generate returns. Booking and Airbnb also continue to profit from rentals in Israeli-occupied land. Airbnb briefly delisted properties on illegal settlements in 2018 but later reverted to donating profits from such listings to humanitarian causes, a practice the report referred to as 'humanitarian-washing'. Are private companies liable under international law? According to Albanese's report, yes. Corporate entities are under an obligation to avoid violating human rights through direct action or in their business partnerships. States have the primary responsibility to ensure that corporate entities respect human rights and must prevent, investigate and punish abuses by private actors. However, corporations must respect human rights even if the state where they operate does not. A company must therefore assess whether activities or relationships throughout its supply chain risk causing human rights violations or contributing to them, according to the report. The failure to act in line with international law may result in criminal liability. Individual executives can be held criminally liable, including before international courts. The report called on companies to divest from all activities linked to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, which is illegal under international law. In July 2024, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion ruling that Israel's continued presence in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem should come to an end 'as rapidly as possible'. In light of this advisory opinion, the UN General Assembly demanded that Israel bring to an end its unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory by September 2025. Albanese's report said the ICJ's ruling 'effectively qualifies the occupation as an act of aggression … Consequently, any dealings that support or sustain the occupation and its associated apparatus may amount to complicity in an international crime under the Rome Statute. 'States must not provide aid or assistance or enter into economic or trade dealings, and must take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that would assist in maintaining the illegal situation created by Israel in the oPt.'
