July 3, 2025 – A new report by the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory accuses numerous global corporations of aiding Israel in its controversial actions in Gaza, actions described as genocidal under international law. The report, authored by Francesca Albanese, is set to be unveiled at a news conference in Geneva, spotlighting 48 corporate entities, including major U.S. tech firms like Microsoft, Alphabet Inc., and Amazon.
The report is part of a broader investigation that compiled a database of over 1000 corporate entities allegedly involved in these activities. It suggests that Israel’s ongoing occupation has become a lucrative testing ground for arms manufacturers and tech companies, with little oversight and accountability. The report argues that these companies are not merely implicated but are embedded in what it describes as an “economy of genocide.”
Corporate Involvement in Military and Surveillance Activities
Among the companies named, U.S.-based Lockheed Martin leads the world’s largest arms procurement program, supplying F-35 fighter jets with components sourced from 1600 companies across eight countries. The report highlights the involvement of Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A and Japan’s FANUC Corporation in military production.
In the tech sector, firms like Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon are accused of enhancing Israel’s surveillance capabilities by providing cloud and AI technologies. IBM is noted for its role in managing biometric data crucial to Israel’s permit regime, while Palantir Technologies is alleged to have supplied predictive policing technology used in military operations.
Dual-Use Technologies and Civilian Applications
The report also identifies companies developing civilian technologies that serve dual purposes, aiding Israel’s occupation efforts. Caterpillar, Leonardo-owned Rada Electronic Industries, and others provide machinery for home demolitions and settlement development. Booking and Airbnb are criticized for listing properties in occupied territories, contributing to the normalization of illegal settlements.
In the energy sector, Drummond Company and Glencore are named as coal suppliers, while in agriculture, Chinese-owned Tnuva and Netafim are implicated in exploiting resources in occupied territories.
Investment and Financial Implications
The report points to major investment firms like BlackRock and Vanguard as significant investors in these companies, highlighting a financial ecosystem that profits from the occupation. BlackRock, for instance, holds substantial shares in Palantir, Microsoft, and other tech giants.
According to the report, Israel’s military spending has surged, with the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange experiencing unprecedented growth, reflecting the financial benefits reaped by these corporations. Insurance companies like Allianz and AXA are also implicated for their investments linked to the occupation.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
The report underscores the legal obligations of corporations to respect human rights, regardless of the host state’s policies. It warns of potential criminal liabilities for companies and executives involved in activities supporting the occupation. The International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion from July 2024, which calls for an end to Israel’s occupation, is cited as a pivotal legal framework.
Albanese’s report urges companies to divest from activities linked to the occupation, aligning with international law and ethical business practices. It emphasizes the role of states in ensuring corporate compliance with human rights standards.
Looking Ahead: Global Reactions and Consequences
The release of this report is likely to provoke significant international debate and scrutiny of the named corporations. As the UN General Assembly’s September 2025 deadline for Israel to end its occupation approaches, the pressure on companies and governments to act in accordance with international law will intensify.
In conclusion, the report not only highlights the complex web of corporate involvement in Israel’s actions but also calls for a reevaluation of the global business practices that support such conflicts. The implications for international law, corporate ethics, and geopolitical relations are profound, setting the stage for potential shifts in policy and practice.
