Skip to main content

Israel and Deadly Investments

Several UK current account providers finance Israeli settlements, weapons, and military. 

This article looks at which banks are complicit and which have pro-active policies to avoid financing settlements or weapons or military activity in Palestine. 

It provides clear information about which companies are most complicit, and can help inform consumers’ decisions so you can decide which banks deserve your custom.

It takes a lot of companies to keep an apartheid regime afloat. weapons manufacturers supplying These companies – ranging weapons manufacturers supplying the Israeli military, to travel booking companies renting out rooms in illegal settlements on Palestinian land – often receive financial services from banks.

Banks have the right to decide who they provide financing to, and for what purposes. In this article we’ve collated information from NGO reports, company websites, and financial filings to show which leading UK current account providers are most heavily linked to Palestinian human rights abuses.

The least and most complicit finance providers

Our research assesses banks’ policies around financing military and weapons in general; evidence of financing companies supplying weapons to Israel; and evidence of financing companies linked to settlements. This is set out in the three tables below.

The companies that appear not to finance any settlement or weapons/military activity, and are therefore considered the least complicit, are: 

The most complicit banks – which have recently financed companies involved in settlements and supply of weapons to the Israeli military, are: 

How banks rate for their financial policies and involvement with Israeli state

We assessed banks against three different policies and practices:

  • Policies around weapons/military beyond excluding the most controversial weapons (table 1)
  • Provides financing for weapons/military (table 2)
  • Finances companies linked to settlements (table 3)

For each of these aspects there were three ratings: 

  • Least complicit (good): no involvement, or had a policy against financing
  • Average: some involvement, company not mentioned in major investigative reports
  • Most complicity (poor): actively funds military involvement, no restrictions, listed in investigative reports

The tables below show which finance companies fall into which rating for each policy/practice. 

Table 1

Policies around weapons/military beyond excluding the most controversial weapons
Policy Company
The company prohibits financing weapons/military Al Rayan, Cumberland Building Society, Dankse Bank, HSBC*, Metro Bank, Monzo, Nationwide, Revolut, Starling, Triodos 
Some restrictions around weapons/military financing beyond the most controversial (which most banks prohibit) Co-operative Bank, NatWest Group
No or very limited restrictions on financing weapons and military beyond the most controversial Banco Santander, Bank of Ireland Group, Barclays, ICICI, JP Morgan, Lloyds Banking Group, Svenska Handelsbanken, TSB, Virgin Money

*HSBC says it prohibits financing of clients which manufacture, trade, purchase, or sell weapons for military use. But its practices don’t match this policy.

Table 2 

Evidence of financing weapons/military
Policy Company
Does not finance weapons/military Al Rayan, Co-operative Bank, Cumberland Building Society, Dankse Bank, Metro Bank, Monzo, Nationwide, Revolut, Starling, Svenska Handelsbanken, Triodos, TSB
Not listed in major reports, but still finances companies supplying arms to Israel  ICICI (recently financed Boeing Co.)
Listed in one or more reports, showing that it is a major financier of companies supplying arms to Israel.*  Banco Santander, Barclays, HSBC, JP Morgan, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest Group

*Reports: 

Bank of Ireland Group and Virgin Money: No investment/lending disclosure found, so not in table 2.

Table 3

Evidence of financing companies linked to settlements
Policy Company
Does not finance companies linked to settlements Al Rayan, Co-operative Bank, Cumberland Building Society, Metro Bank, Monzo, Nationwide, Revolut, Starling, Triodos
Not listed in major reports, but still finances companies linked to settlements by BDS campaigners  ICICI (Recently financed Airbnb and Booking Holdings.), TSB
Listed in the ‘Don’t Buy into the Occupation’ report (November 2024) showing that it is a major financier of companies involved in settlements Banco Santander, Barclays, Dankse Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest Group, Svenska Handelsbanken 

*'Don't Buy into the Occupation' report. Report used data covering the period January 2021 to September 2024 (loans/underwriting) and latest filing available September 2024 (shares/bonds).

Bank of Ireland Group and Virgin Money: No investment/lending disclosure found, so not in table 3.


Evidence and position of some of the most complicit banks

Some of the investigative reports rank the banks on the level of financing. Below we have listed the most complicit banks with their rankings, broadly in order of worst first.

J.P. Morgan

Barclays

Banco Santander

Lloyds Banking Group

HSBC

NatWest Group 

Dankse Bank

Svenska Handelsbanken

Banking groups: who's who?

Looking for a banking brand which isn't in the tables? It is probably part of a larger banking group. Here are the main ones:

  • Banco Santander brands: Cater Allen, Santander
  • Bank of Ireland Group brands: Bank of Ireland, Post Office
  • Co-operative Bank brands: Co-operative Bank, Smile; now owned by Coventry Building Society
  • HSBC brands: First Direct, HSBC
  • JP Morgan brands: Chase
  • Lloyds Banking Group brands: Bank of Scotland, Halifax, Lloyds,
  • NatWest Group brands: Coutts Private Banking, NatWest, Royal Bank of Scotland, Ulster Bank
  • Virgin Money brands: Clydesdale Bank, Virgin Money, Yorkshire Bank; now owned by Nationwide

Broader connections with the Israeli state

We didn’t include a column about whether or not the bank boycotts all Israeli institutions and organisations, because no bank does that. In fact, the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is not campaigning for that – it asks supporters to focus on targets that are complicit with apartheid, for example through having specific ties with the state apparatus.

While our research didn’t assess connections to the state of Israel beyond settlements and weapons/military, this is another important area where banks might be complicit. 

JP Morgan and Barclays are the two companies offering UK current accounts that provide significant underwriting services to the Israeli state, according to an investigation conducted by Netherlands-based financial research group Profundo and published by Dutch NGOs BankTrack and PAX. The campaigners describe the banks named as underwriting “war bonds”, saying they play a key role in enabling Israel’s assault on Gaza. 

Banks and South African Apartheid 

The Palestinian BDS movement was inspired by the South African anti-Apartheid movement. Former anti-Apartheid leaders including Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu have spoken out about the parallels between Apartheid South Africa and the situation in Palestine today.

During South African apartheid, the “banks campaign” was part of the international pressure to implement financial sanctions against the country. South Africa was vulnerable to campaigns around banking because of its dependence on foreign investment, and Britain was the most important source of foreign capital to South Africa.

The campaign called for the banks to disengage entirely from South Africa. In 1971, these campaigners pioneered the tactic of buying shares to protest at a company annual general meeting. Campaigners lobbied Barclays to withdraw from South Africa from 1970, until the bank pulled out in 1986. 

Activists taking action against banks

Several banks have been targeted by activist groups over their support for weapons companies. For example, activists disrupted Lloyds Banking Group's 2024 shareholder meeting in Glasgow, and direct action campaign group Palestine Action targeted a JP Morgan property in Edinburgh over its investment in Elbit. Palestine Solidarity Campaign continues to call for a boycott of Barclays Bank.

What impacts have campaigns against financial institutions had?

It’s not simple to measure how successful campaigns calling on financial institutions to end complicity with the Israeli state have been, but here are a few examples which suggest campaigns have an impact – and at minimum, generate publicity and increase awareness about banks’ role in propping up the Israeli military and settlements.

Successes: Danske Bank and KLP

There are some clear wins. For example, in 2010, Danske Bank divested from Elbit Systems following demands from campaigners. 

KLP (Norway’s pension fund) has excluded several companies linked to settlements and the Israeli military, including Caterpillar in 2024 and Elbit Systems and Motorola in 2021.

Blue poster with outline of military plane and bomb. Words 'Barclays don't bank on apartheid'

Tentative success but the campaign continues: Barclays

In June 2024, Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), Campaign Against the Arms Trade, and War on Want published a report documenting Barclays' "Bankrolling [of] genocide and apartheid". Barclays faced a boycott call from PSC, and sustained direct action against its branches by campaign group Palestine Action.

Barclays said "We have been asked why we invest in nine defence companies supplying Israel, but this mistakes what we do. We trade in shares of listed companies in response to client instruction or demand and that may result in us holding shares." This didn’t appease campaigners, who argued that the company was still complicit.

The bank’s latest 2024 financial reports show no investment in Elbit Systems, and PSC and Palestine Action claim this shows their efforts are having an impact, and celebrated it as a campaign victory in October 2024. It showed a drop from $3,400,000 of shares in Elbit held by the bank in May 2024.

However, PSC continues to call for a boycott of Barclays until it divests from all other complicit companies as well as Elbit, and makes a public statement confirming that it has officially severed ties with Elbit (which it has never done). PSC claims that in 2015 Barclays temporarily divested from Elbit following campaign pressure but then reinvested. It says it’s monitoring Barclays' financial filings closely to see if this happens again.

Partial success: AXA

While not a bank, AXA provides a range of financial services. It’s long been targeted by a boycott call by the global Stop AXA Assistance to Israeli Apartheid campaign, due to its investment in Israeli banks, Elbit Systems, and settlements.

It divested from Elbit fully in 2019, and from two Israeli banks in 2022, and by 2024 AXA had effectively divested from all three remaining Israeli banks. A campaigner with corporate accountability group Eko, Lelli Kashani, said: “Our data and the sharp drops in our graphs despite steady or rising share prices show that AXA divested due to external pressure to stop crimes against Palestinians, and not in response to market prices.” The BDS movement’s Europe Coordinator, Fiona Ben Chekroun, said “The confirmation of AXA’s divestment from all Israeli banks and Elbit Systems is a major milestone for the movement that follows years of strategic BDS campaigning.”

However, that doesn’t mean it’s fully ended complicity. A recent report shows that in June 2024 AXA held over $150m in shares and bonds in eleven companies that armed Israel during the genocide in Gaza. So the campaign calling on the company to end complicity continues. The BDS Movement is still calling for a boycott of AXA.

Some banks have gone back on previous positive divestment commitments 

Banks might sever ties with a complicit company but then resume them at a later date. Sometimes banks appear to have divested, but it later emerges that they once again hold shares or are providing other financial services. Here we list three examples of banks and financial institutions changing their minds.

Danske Bank

In 2014, Danske Bank made headlines when it excluded Israeli Bank Hapoalim from its investment portfolio over its ties to Israeli settlements.

Two years later, Danske Bank removed the company from the exclusion list. In 2024, it was invested in Bank Hapoalim.

HSBC

HSBC faced monthly demonstrations outside (and sometimes inside) 40 UK HSBC branches, and received emails from over 24,000 War on Want supporters about its complicit investments. In 2018, the BDS Movement announced a campaign success, saying HSBC had divested from Elbit Systems: “Global banking giant HSBC confirmed to us that it has divested completely from Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems after a year of campaign pressure.”

In September 2020, HSBC once again held shares in Elbit, and it was listed as providing financial services to Elbit Systems in the 2024 Don’t Buy Into Occupation report.

PGGM

In 2014, Dutch pension group PGGM divested from five leading Israeli banks over “ethical concerns”.

In 2019, it reversed this decision.

Research as a campaign tool

Over the past decade, reports containing robust research methodologies from, for example, War on Want and Human Rights Watch have helped make it possible to map links to Israel’s crimes. 

This not only provides clear information about which companies are most complicit and so can help inform consumers’ decisions, it also improves transparency and creates new avenues for campaigners to use to expose and take action to end corporate complicity with the Israeli regime.

Why focus on banks?

Banks have an enormous amount of power and wealth. 

UK banks recorded pre-tax profits of almost £50 billion in 2021. 

Banks also choose where to provide financial support, in the form of loans or investments. This support determines whether corporations can build an oil rig, expand their munitions production, or develop their wind farms. In other words, they can decide what our economy, industries, and planet look like now and into the future. 

They therefore hold massive sway over the nature of our economies.

On a consumer level, ethical banking is also important, even if you think your savings aren’t worth much. For every £1 a bank holds, it can lend out £9. This means that if you have £12,500 in savings (the median amount of savings for a UK household), your financial provider could lend out £112,500 to either clean or dirty industries.

Ethical banking therefore offers a chance to both align your money with your values and make a really meaningful impact.

Take action

If you want to find out more, including switching to more ethical banks and building societies (e.g. the least complicit), check out some of the following actions you could take:

1) Read the shopping guide to ethical current accounts and ethical savings accounts (these are due to be updated in by 4th April)

2) Adapt our template letter if you switch banks to let your old bank know why you are leaving them.

3) Head to our main Palestine page which has links to boycott information, campaigns and groups to support, alternatives to brands listed in boycotts, and information on the BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) movement.

4) Sign up to our weekly newsletter to receive updates, news, and information about ethical choices. 

Research by Marlous Veldt.