BDS Movement Sparks Corporate Panic Over Israel!

Right, so the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, aimed as it primarily is in the world right now at pressuring Israel to end its atrocities in the Palestinian territories and comply with international law, has increasingly been targeting not only goods and services from Israel but also corporations seen to be complicit in Israel’s human rights abuses. Your McDonalds, your Coca Cola, your Starbucks are probably amongst the better known examples of this. But in a show that BDS works, even against some of the biggest global corporations, a rather interesting boardroom clash occurred this week. One of the most significant recent confrontations occurred at the Annual General Meeting, the AGM of Maersk, the world’s second-largest shipping company, where shareholders voted on a proposal to ban arms shipments to Israel. This vote, which has come amongst much by way of demonstrations and protests, as well as outright denials from the company highlights the growing influence of BDS in challenging corporate complicity in Israel’s actions in Gaza. Despite Maersk’s denials of involvement in arms shipments to Israel, the fact shareholders themselves demanded this vote and the surrounding controversy over what Maersk have or have not been up to, raise critical questions about the company’s role in facilitating Israel’s military operations and the broader implications for businesses worldwide. If they weren’t doing something untowards, why were some shareholders calling for such a vote after all?
Right, so BDS being enacted against the second largest shipping company on the planet, Maersk, both from outside the company and within it, such is the power of protest, the power of bad publicity to make companies think twice and by companies, the shareholders at that, weighing up the prospect of doing business with Israel to deliver arms and military equipment to them being good or bad for business, god or bad for their own financial returns. Certainly a split amongst shareholders has happened in this instance, cages well and truly having been rattled.
The proposal to ban arms shipments to Israel was brought forward by a group of shareholders called on Maersk to cease all involvement in transporting military equipment to Israel, citing the company’s potential complicity in war crimes and genocide in Gaza. Now a cynic like me might think well, they’re more worried about their own pockets than Gaza given the weight of evidence against Maersk, mounting evidence that Maersk had shipped military equipment to Israel, including components used in its ongoing military operations in Gaza, but lets set that cynicism aside for now.
At the AGM held in Copenhagen on Tuesday of this week, the proposal sparked some heated debate. Maersk’s board of directors vehemently opposed the motion, arguing that the company does not engage in arms shipments to Israel and that such a ban would be unnecessary and harmful to its business operations. Despite these denials, the board’s resistance to the proposal raises eyebrows and prompts questions because quite simply, why would Maersk’s board oppose a ban on arms shipments if it claims not to be involved in such activities? There’s no loss and no foul unless your lying of course?
The shareholder vote ultimately rejected the proposal, but the fact that it was brought to the table at all is still significant. The vote reflects the growing pressure on corporations to address their role in enabling Israel’s actions in Gaza and the increasing influence of the BDS movement in shaping corporate accountability and certainly in light of this vote and how it went, that isn’t going to let up on Maersk. Even though the motion was defeated, the conversation it forced demonstrates that BDS is making even massive corporations like Maersk “wobble” over their support for Israel through their business dealings.
Maersk has consistently denied any involvement in shipping arms to Israel, stating that it adheres to strict ethical guidelines and international laws. In a statement released ahead of the AGM, the company reiterated that it does not transport military equipment to Israel and that its operations are focused on commercial goods. However, these denials have been met with, lets call it, skepticism, particularly in light of evidence suggesting otherwise.
Reports have surfaced linking Maersk to the transportation of military equipment to Israel, something they do not deny, but do deny shipping arms. That said though, in 2024, a Maersk container ship was denied entry to the Spanish port of Algeciras, with authorities citing its alleged transport of weapons for Israel, a claim Maersk has denied. Since the spring of 2024, Spain has prohibited ships carrying weapons destined for Israel from docking in its ports.
Again, the question has to be asked of Maersk’s board though - if Maersk truly does not ship arms to Israel, why did it oppose a ban on such shipments?
Here’s a New Arab excerpt shedding further light:
‘Maersk on Tuesday denied shipping arms or ammunition to Israel during its war in Gaza in response to a shareholder proposal at its annual general meeting (AGM) but acknowledged shipping military-related cargo.
"Maersk has a strict policy of not shipping weapons or ammunitions into any active conflict zone," CEO Vincent Clerc told shareholders.
"We are fully compliant with all applicable laws," adding that Maersk acts in accordance with United Nations guiding principles on business and human rights and OECD guidelines on responsible business conduct.
Maersk ships cargo to Israel for US government agencies with its US subsidiary Maersk Line, Limited (MLL).
Both shareholder proposals were dismissed by shareholders. The family-owned holding company Maersk Holding owns 41.5 percent of the shares and 54.5 percent of the votes in the Danish company.
Clerc said Maersk does transport military-related cargo, albeit in accordance with all laws.
"When we draw a line between what we accept to transport and what we don't, it's done after a very careful assessment and considering recommendations and regulations," said Clerc. "We realize that our line may not coincide with the wishes of everybody."’
Did I say shed further light? Its just muddied the waters further. Shipping to Israel from US government agencies will raise alarm bells, what else could the US be shipping to Israel? Though to be honest if I was looking at arms shipments, knowing how much of that is flown to Israel from RAF Akrotiri, I’d be looking at shipping arriving in Cyprus just as much.
Fundamentally though, the company’s reluctance to adopt a clear policy lets call it, against arms transportation suggests a lack of commitment to ethical business practices it claims to uphold and a willingness to prioritise profits over human rights. Certainly military equipment is shipped by Maersk and that surely is bad enough?
Maersk’s alleged arms shipments to Israel have of course sparked widespread protests and public outcry. Outside the AGM in Copenhagen, activists from various organizations, from MUA Australia to Greta Thunberg, gathered to demand accountability from Maersk.
Similar protests have taken place at other Maersk properties around the world. Hre in the UKk, in Maidenhead, pro-Palestine activists targeted a Maersk office, accusing the company of facilitating genocide in Gaza.
The involvement of labour unions, such as the MUA, in the campaign against Maersk highlights the growing solidarity between workers’ rights movements and the Palestinian cause as well. The MUA’s call for Maersk to end arms shipments to Israel underscores the intersection of labour rights and human rights, as workers refuse to be complicit in the oppression of Palestinians.
By targeting corporations complicit in Israel’s actions, BDS has succeeded in raising awareness about the role of businesses in enabling human rights abuses and has forced companies to confront their ethical responsibilities, to greater or lesser effect, the fight goes on after all.
The fact that a proposal to ban arms shipments to Israel was even considered at Maersk’s AGM is a testament to the power of public pressure and the growing influence of BDS. While the motion was ultimately defeated, the conversation it sparked has put Maersk and other corporations on notice, that complicity in Israel’s actions will not go unchallenged.
The BDS movement’s success in targeting corporations like Maersk also highlights the importance of grassroots activism in holding businesses accountable. By mobilising public opinion and leveraging shareholder activism, BDS has demonstrated that ordinary citizens can challenge even the most powerful corporations and demand ethical business practices, it is little wonder mainstream media do nothing but attack the notion of BDS in which case is it? Who’s side are they on? I think we know by now.
The Maersk shareholder vote and the protests surrounding it underscore the urgent need for corporate accountability in the face of Israel’s actions in Gaza. While Maersk has denied involvement in arms shipments to Israel, the evidence and public pressure and the admission to transporting military equipment won’t make those accusations and questions go away. The fact that the proposal to ban such shipments was brought to the table—and the board’s opposition to it—reveals the contradictions and issues facing corporations seen to be complicit in human rights abuses.
The BDS movement’s impact on Maersk and other businesses demonstrates the power of collective action in challenging corporate complicity and advocating for justice. As consumers, shareholders, and citizens, we all have a responsibility to hold corporations accountable and demand ethical business practices and that must continue for as long as it takes.
This is of course of all the more importance as Israel renews its genocide of Gaza and grows ever worse, not least with the return of an absolute monster to the Netanyahu government now that the fighting has started again. The timing of Maersk’s boardroom decision here frankly couldn’t be worse therefore so check out that story in this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch. Please do also hit like, share and susbscribe if you haven’t done so already so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as supporting the channel which is very much appreciated and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks