Israel Faces A Jaw-Dropping Delay In Arms Deliveries!

Right, so is Israel about to have its dastardly deliveries from the US interrupted? Well quite possibly, but some of that has been going on already and you mightn’t have heard too much about that, however things might get a whole lot worse for one shipping company in particular and with BDS already hitting them as well, being dragged to court where it all might be about to come out will be deservedly catastrophic not just for the company, but Israel and its genocidal tendencies at the same time.
For quite a while now Danish shipping giant Maersk has been subject to BDS actions, widely suspected to be transporting arms and munitions and other military hardware to Israel. This has elicited denials from Maersk itself, its board, but we’ll soon see if that is the case. This is a company that has been blocked from docking in Spain when its shipping has been suspected of transporting arms for Israel, blocked as that is by Spanish ports, it has elicited strike action from unions in Morocco too, closing down the number of ports in the Med that will entertain Israeli munitions still further, but for it to proven in law that this is what Maersk is actually doing, will be huge, not just in terms of the blow for a company that evidently has chosen profit margins before morals, but in terms of who else will deliver to Israel if Maersk’s shareholders, already concerned about such deliveries despite denials from their board, choose to act off the back of it.
Right, so in the wake of the relentless ongoing Israeli bombardment of Gaza and growing international condemnation of what many now widely regard as a genocide, the global spotlight has begun to turn not only to states who may be aiding and abetting Israel, but to the corporations facilitating these atrocities as well. Among these, shipping giant Maersk has been embroiled in controversy over its alleged role in delivering arms to Israel, a story this channel has covered on several occasions previously, as a private court case in Spain gathers growing momentum and interest amongst people who have heard about it. This action has been filed by the pro-Palestinian rights organisation, Prou Complicitat amb Israel - Stop Complicity with Israel – which is much easier to say. The case charges Maersk with complicity in crimes that may be classified under international law as genocide, crimes against humanity, and illicit arms trafficking, so they’re going big, going hard and clearly they think they’re in with a chance.
The Barcelona court’s decision to hear the case against Maersk marks a significant turning point. At its core are accusations that Maersk facilitated the transport of arms- specifically in the case of the two ships named, parts for F-35 bombers-to Israel amid its ongoing military campaign in Gaza. The vessels named in the investigation, the Nexoe and the Detroit, are alleged to have carried military cargo through Spanish and Moroccan ports. Moroccan dockworkers refused to unload these ships, citing the suspected contents and invoking solidarity with Palestinians, this is a story I’ve covered previously. This workers’ strike not only disrupted logistics but also amplified public scrutiny of Maersk again, we don’t think about shipping companies and what they might get up to travelling the world enough, but it is especially pertinent here given Spain officially banned arms being transported to Israel via its ports some time ago, amid the rising list of genocidal actions Israel had been committing.
Despite these legal prohibitions though, Spain’s ports also stand accused of reportedly continuing to facilitate arms transfers, often under opaque circumstances. Prou Complicitat amb Israel argues that these illicit practices make port authorities and shipping companies culpable in violating both national and international law. The group has also long campaigned against the use of Spanish infrastructure to support Israeli military logistics, and their persistence has now seen them bring this case against Maersk.
This is hardly the first time Maersk has been caught in headlines surrounding deliveries to Israel though. Supporting these legal claims is a damning November 2024 investigation by The Intercept, which unveiled evidence that Maersk had been shipping military goods to Israel through Spanish ports, contravening the embargo. According to the report, vessels such as the Denver and Seletar, from that time, were prevented from docking in Spain due to suspicions that their cargo included weapons or dual-use materials destined for Israel’s military. Here’s an excerpt detailing some of their other findings:
‘Israel has long used armoured vehicles as killing machines throughout the occupied Palestinian territories. Images of Palestinians crushed by Israeli tanks and trucks are now grimly familiar to anyone paying attention to the ongoing Israeli onslaught in Gaza.
Maersk’s role in shipping the Oshkosh armoured vehicles came to light as part of a new investigation from researchers with the Palestinian Youth Movement and Progressive International. The investigation details how Maersk has shipped millions of pounds of military goods, including hundreds of armoured and tactical vehicles and their components, to the Israeli Ministry of Defence since Israel’s genocidal war began last year.
The findings, shared in advance with The Intercept, reveal the significant role that Maersk — a publicly traded, family-controlled company — has played in delivering military goods to Israel, including tanks and other armoured vehicles or their parts, aircraft components, armoured plates, parts for artillery systems, and many hundreds of shipments that are unidentified or unspecified “military equipment.”
Analysing shipment export data from over 2,000 shipments over the last year, the researchers report that they were able to reveal a commercial supply chain rife with materiel bound for use in Israel’s assault on Gaza. The researchers said the available shipping data suggests that Maersk ships violated a Spanish embargo policy by transiting through the port of Algeciras.’
The Intercept’s findings align with a growing body of evidence showing a consistent pattern, that while Maersk publicly denies transporting weapons, its ships continue to be linked with arms shipments, raising questions about whether these denials are genuine or not.
Maersk has consistently denied any involvement in transporting arms to Israel, despite mounting evidence and widespread concern about them very much transporting vehicles and parts as that excerpt made mention of. In march, a shareholder motion was introduced by activists amongst said shareholders, demanding the company ban the shipment of weapons to conflict zones, especially Israel. The motion was ultimately defeated, with the board insisting that Maersk was not engaged in such practices, doesn’t transport weapons, though their view of what constitutes a weapon and what doesn’t may well face a reckoning in Barcelona.
But it also highlights an internal contradiction—public denials, shareholder denials versus documented suspicions, apparently evidenced to the point they’re getting dragged to court—well it does seem to me to expose a profound hypocrisy here. If Maersk was indeed not complicit, not doing anything of the kind, completely innocent, it would presumably have no objection to affirming a formal ban. Whre’s the harm? That a majority of shareholders voted against the motion based on unverifiable assurances raises suspicions quite justifiably surely? It underscores the limitations of corporate self-regulation in matters of grave international concern as well.
In response to these allegations, activists have escalated their campaigns against Maersk. The Palestinian Youth Movement launched the "Mask Off Maersk" initiative last June, aimed at exposing the company’s complicity and mobilising global resistance against them. This campaign has continued to gain traction, all the more so it seems after the Spanish court proceedings became public knowledge. Activists in the Netherlands, including the Dutch group Geef Tegengas, physically blocked Maersk’s Rotterdam office, chaining themselves to the gates and making plenty of noise to draw attention to what they accuse Maersk of doing.
The campaign stresses that shipping companies like Maersk play a vital but underappreciated role in facilitating war crimes, a point I agree with, that I touched on before and therefore they must be held accountable alongside arms manufacturers and governments, because they form part of the supply chain. The protests and blockades are part of a broader grassroots strategy to impose reputational and operational costs on corporations enabling state violence, as Maersk are here in this instance.
This legal and activist momentum is also mirrored in Spain’s political sphere right now. In what is a bit of a landmark moment, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has just stood up in the Spanish parliament and called Israel a genocidal state. He literally said the words, the phrasing that his left wing coalition partner party Sumar have been vocal in saying and now he has. Israel promptly summoned the Spanish ambassador, demanding an explanation, because of course they did, but he’s stuck by it.
Though critics accuse Sanchez of hypocrisy for continuing diplomatic and economic relations with Israel, an accusation which elicited that response, his words reflect a broader shift in international discourse. It is increasingly difficult for global leaders to ignore the mounting civilian death toll and destruction in Gaza. That a European head of state has used the term genocide in an official capacity now though, can’t be ignored for its significance and he is of course absolutely right in my view.
The Maersk case raises some profound questions as well though: Can a corporation be held criminally liable for indirectly contributing to war crimes? What responsibilities do logistics companies bear in an age where borders mean very little to global supply chains?
So by bringing this case as a private prosecution, Prou Complicitat amb Israel is not merely seeking judicial redress—it is challenging a global system that allows multinational corporations to operate with impunity. If successful, the case could set a precedent for prosecuting corporations as accessories to state crimes, it would send shockwaves around the world to all corporations who might be involved. Legal scholars have long debated whether international law adequately addresses corporate complicity in global atrocities, I think the answer to that is a resounding no, but this case might finally expose that.
The Maersk controversy is all part of the broader landscape of global complicity in Israeli military actions. From US arms shipments to European companies profiting from military contracts, a vast network supports Israel’s military machine. Identifying the parts of them from one end of the supply chain to the other is the trick to stopping it. Cut it off in the middle.
Yet there is also a growing counterforce to that complicity. Civil society, trade unions, investigative journalists, and activists are increasingly mobilising to expose and obstruct these operations. Dockworkers in Morocco refusing to unload Maersk vessels; journalists at The Intercept or any other independent media you care to think of not only exposing the truth but publishing it, youth activists blocking office buildings—these acts represent a new front in the fight against militarised capitalism, all driven by as it happens, ordinary working class people, the likes of you and I.
The case against Maersk should be a wake-up call for consumers, investors, and policymakers. It illustrates that global corporations are not neutral bystanders but active agents whose choices have deadly consequences. The logistics industry, often overlooked in discussions of war profiteering, must be scrutinised and regulated with the same intensity as those who make the weapons and munitions and armoured vehicles are.
Maersk, with its vast fleet and global reach, exemplifies this challenge. It has the power to influence international conflict zones not only by what it chooses to transport but also by what it refuses to carry. So far, its denials ring increasingly hollow, contradicted by investigative reports, dockworker actions, and now legal scrutiny is coming for them too.
Meanwhile, whilst Maersk might be delivering F-35 parts to Israel to the disgust of those dockworkers in Morocco, they might not be doing so for much long for another reason – the Houthis appear capable of shooting them down now! So much for being the cutting edge of US aerial superiority eh? Get all the details of that story in this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch.
Please do also hit like, share and subscribe if you haven’t done so already so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as spreading the word and helping to support the channel at the same time which is very much appreciated, holding power to account for ordinary working class people and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks