KLM Political Audit

1. Executive Intelligence Summary

1.1 Audit Scope and Objective

This report constitutes an exhaustive forensic audit of the political and ideological footprint of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (hereafter “KLM” or “the Entity”). The objective is to determine the Entity’s level of “Political Complicity” regarding the State of Israel, the occupation of Palestinian territories, and the ongoing military campaigns in Gaza and the West Bank. The audit utilizes a multi-dimensional “Governance Ideology” framework, screening leadership, operational alliances, supply chain logistics, and crisis response mechanisms to rank the Entity on a scale from None to Upper-Extreme.

The analysis relies on a rigorous examination of primary source intelligence, including board compositions, executive rhetoric, operational contracts, union disclosures, and comparative crisis management protocols. The audit specifically seeks to identify material or ideological support for systems of apartheid, surveillance, or militarization, isolating areas where corporate neutrality has been abandoned in favor of geopolitical alignment.

1.2 Strategic Assessment: High Political Complicity

Based on the totality of evidence gathered and analyzed in this report, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines is classified as an entity of HIGH COMPLICITY.

This classification is not derived from a single operational decision but from a systemic pattern of governance and strategic behavior that privileges the interests of the State of Israel above standard corporate risk mitigation, employee safety, and international humanitarian norms. The audit identifies four critical vectors of complicity:

1. The “Smith Doctrine” (Executive Ideological Capture): The Group CEO, Benjamin Smith, has publicly articulated a Zionist geopolitical worldview that rejects moral complexity regarding the Gaza conflict. His explicit alignment (“I stand with Israel”) and refusal to acknowledge the context of occupation permeates the strategic direction of the airline, creating a “permission structure” for pro-Israel bias at the operational level.¹
2. Operational Deepening During Kinetic Conflict: In July 2024, amidst the intensification of the Gaza war and concurrent proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), KLM engaged in a strategic expansion of ties by launching a reciprocal codeshare agreement with El Al Israel Airlines. This decision, taken during a period of global reputational divestment, represents a material affirmation of the Israeli aviation sector, which functions as a critical auxiliary to the state’s military apparatus.²
3. The “Safe Harbor” Double Standard: A forensic comparative analysis of KLM’s total operational withdrawal from Russian airspace (Ukraine crisis, 2022) versus its persistent, resource-intensive efforts to maintain connectivity with Tel Aviv (Gaza crisis, 2023-2026) reveals a distinct discriminatory application of corporate policy. While the former was treated as a moral and security absolute, the latter is treated as an operational challenge to be overcome, evidencing an ideological bias toward maintaining the “air bridge” to Israel.³
4. Securitization and Surveillance Integration: Through its primary hub at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, KLM’s passengers and operations are processed via security architectures provided by I-SEC, a subsidiary of the Israeli-founded ICTS International. This relationship effectively normalizes Israeli state-linked securitization protocols—often predicated on racial and political profiling—within the Dutch aviation ecosystem.⁵

1.3 Risk Implication Matrix

The audit finds that the ideological footprint is concentrated at the Air France-KLM Group level (Strategic Governance) but is aggressively implemented at the KLM operational level, often in direct contravention of local labor union (VNC) safety concerns. This creates a high-risk environment for investors concerned with ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) compliance, specifically regarding human rights and complicity in conflict zones.

2. Governance Ideology: The Anatomy of Alignment

The “Governance Ideology” component screens the Board of Directors, CEO, and Executive Committee for evidence of ideological bias, advocacy membership, or rhetoric that aligns the corporate entity with a specific political actor. The analysis reveals a governance structure heavily tilted toward a “Civilizational” defense of Israel.

2.1 The “Smith Doctrine”: Explicit Zionist Alignment

The most significant indicator of ideological complicity resides with Benjamin Smith, the CEO of the Air France-KLM Group. As the strategic head of the holding company, his worldview dictates the geopolitical posture of both airlines, overriding local Dutch sensitivities.

Intelligence gathered indicates that Mr. Smith has abandoned the traditional “Corporate Neutrality” stance expected of a multinational CEO in favor of explicit partisan advocacy. Following the events of October 7, Smith publicly adopted positions indistinguishable from Israeli state narratives:

• Rejection of Context: Smith explicitly rejected the notion of “moral complexity” regarding the conflict, stating, “There is no moral complexity in condemning terrorists… I stand with Israel”.¹ By labeling those who seek to contextualize the violence within the history of occupation as “repugnant creatures,” he signaled a zero-tolerance policy for dissenting or nuanced views within the corporate structure.
• Geopolitical Reframing: In a public commentary, Smith utilized a specific Western-centric analogy, comparing the Hamas attack to a hypothetical scenario where “Mexico launched a surprise attack on California”.¹ This analogy is significant for two reasons:
  • Erasure of Occupation: It erases the legal reality of the blockade of Gaza and the military occupation of the West Bank, reframing the conflict purely as an unprovoked assault on a sovereign Western democracy.
  • Civilizational Signaling: It positions Israel as the “California” of the Middle East—a Western outpost deserving of unconditional defense against “foreign” aggression.
• Endorsement of Retribution: Smith publicly endorsed a military response, stating that “justice screams out for a response that permanently cripples the enemy’s ability to wage offense”.¹ This constitutes a corporate endorsement of a military campaign that has subsequently resulted in mass civilian casualties and allegations of genocide.

Audit Insight: This is not merely personal opinion; it is Governance Ideology. When the Group CEO views the defense of the Israeli state as a moral absolute, it creates a permissive environment for deepening commercial ties (such as the El Al codeshare) even when reputational and safety risks are high. It signals to the Board and management that pro-Israel alignment is the corporate standard, and that “neutrality” is effectively viewed as complicity with “repugnant creatures.”

2.2 Board Composition: The Defense Nexus

The governance structure of Air France-KLM and the KLM Supervisory Board is heavily populated by “Politically Exposed Persons” (PEPs) from the French and Dutch political establishments, cementing a state-level alignment with Israel. The presence of these individuals transforms the board from a commercial oversight body into a geopolitical instrument.

Deep Dive: The Florence Parly Factor The Chairwoman of the Board, Florence Parly, represents the most direct link between the airline and the military-industrial complex supporting Israel. During her time as French Defense Minister, Parly actively cultivated defense ties with Israel, viewing the country as a cornerstone of Mediterranean security.⁸ She has openly criticized US disengagement from the region, advocating for a more robust European military posture.¹²

• Implication: Her leadership ensures that KLM’s strategic decisions are viewed through a lens of security cooperation rather than human rights due diligence. The “Parly-Smith Axis” at the top of the Air France-KLM Group effectively captures the subsidiary (KLM) within a hawkish, pro-Israel geopolitical framework.

2.3 The Governance Gap: Group Strategy vs. Local Operations

The audit identifies a distinct “Governance Gap” between the Dutch operational management and the Group strategy.

• KLM (Dutch) Management: This layer is focused on labor relations and local Dutch politics. They face significant pressure from the Amsterdam municipality—where Mayor Femke Halsema has urged the government not to ignore the atrocities in Gaza ¹³—and powerful unions like the VNC.
• AF-KLM (Group) Leadership: This layer, led by Smith and Parly, is focused on global strategy and geopolitical alignment. They drive the pro-Israel policy (codeshares, flight resumption) that the Dutch arm must implement.

Conclusion on Governance: The ideological footprint is concentrated at the Group level but implemented at the operational level. The Group leadership exhibits a “High” to “Upper-Extreme” ideological alignment with Zionist state narratives, effectively holding the operational governance of KLM captive to this worldview.

3. Operational Complicity: The El Al Alliance & Commercial Support

The “Operational Complicity” section audits the material support provided by KLM to the Israeli economy, military, and state legitimacy. The most significant finding in this audit is the counter-intuitive expansion of alliances during active conflict.

3.1 The El Al Codeshare: Normalization Under Fire

In July 2024, nine months into the war in Gaza and amidst proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), KLM and El Al Israel Airlines launched a reciprocal codeshare agreement.² This timeline is critical evidence of complicity.

The Anatomy of the Agreement:

• Scope: KLM placed its code (KL) on El Al flights between Tel Aviv and Amsterdam (and vice versa), while El Al placed its code (LY) on KLM flights between Amsterdam and Tel Aviv, and onward to other destinations.²
• Strategic Timing: The agreement was implemented during a period of extreme violence and international condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza. While many global cultural and academic entities were retracting or pausing partnerships, KLM chose this precise moment to deepen its integration with Israel’s flag carrier.

Complicity Analysis:

1. Economic Support: By selling tickets on El Al flights, KLM directly channels revenue to a company that functions as a strategic asset of the Israeli state. El Al is integral to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, utilized for reserve troop transport and supply logistics during wartime. The codeshare ensures El Al’s financial viability even when its own brand may be toxic to some consumers.
2. Reputational Laundering: Launching a partnership in July 2024 serves as a powerful signal of “Business as Usual” and diplomatic normalization. It effectively launders the reputation of El Al—which carries the stigma of the state’s military actions—through the respectable “Royal Dutch” brand. It signals to the market that the Israeli aviation sector remains a “prime” partner.
3. Operational Resilience: The codeshare allows El Al to maintain connectivity to Europe even if its own capacity is strained or if it faces boycotts. KLM acts as a feeder network for the Israeli carrier, integrating it further into the SkyTeam ecosystem (via KLM’s influence).¹⁴

3.2 Cargo Operations: The Settlement Supply Chain

KLM Cargo (part of the Air France-KLM Martinair Cargo division) is a dominant player in the transport of perishables and high-value goods between Europe and the Middle East.¹⁵

The Agricultural Vector: Israel is a major exporter of agricultural produce to Europe (potatoes, citrus, avocados), a significant portion of which is grown in illegal settlements in the West Bank and Jordan Valley.¹⁷

• Complicity Mechanism: Settlement goods are frequently mislabeled as “Product of Israel” to bypass EU customs differentiation.¹⁹ By operating substantial cargo capacity on the Tel Aviv-Amsterdam route (both via dedicated freighters and the belly-hold of passenger aircraft), KLM Cargo acts as a primary logistical vector for the export of settlement goods to the European market.
• Failure of Diligence: There is no evidence in the public record, internal cargo conditions, or “Compliance Compass” documents ²⁰ that KLM Cargo performs “origin checks” to distinguish between Green Line produce and settlement produce. Under the “Safe Harbor” test, this failure to screen constitutes active complicity in the profitability of the settlement enterprise. The airline accepts the cargo manifest at face value, facilitating the economic viability of the occupation.

Military Logistics and Dual-Use Goods: While KLM maintains restrictions on the transport of explicit weaponry (explosives, firearms) in passenger baggage ²², the categorization of “dual-use” technology creates a loophole. Given the Air France-KLM Engineering & Maintenance (AFI KLM E&M) joint ventures and service contracts with global aerospace firms ²⁴, there is a high structural risk of transporting aviation components, electronics, and software destined for the Israeli defense sector. The high volume of “high-tech” exports from Israel, often linked to the military-industrial complex, relies on secure air cargo routes provided by major carriers like KLM.

4. The “Safe Harbor” Test: Comparative Crisis Management

A critical measure of political complicity in governance auditing is the application of “Double Standards.” This audit compares KLM’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) against its response to the Gaza conflict (2023-2026). The divergence in policy reveals an ideological hierarchy where Israel is afforded “Safe Harbor” status denied to other conflict actors.

4.1 Comparative Matrix: Ukraine vs. Gaza

4.2 Analysis of the “Double Standard”

The audit confirms a “Double Standard” rooted in ideology.

• The Ukraine Precedent: In 2022, KLM demonstrated that it possesses the capacity for decisive moral and safety-based withdrawal. The decision to suspend flights to Kyiv was taken before the invasion, based on intelligence reports and a desire to align with Western diplomatic posturing against Russia. The “Red Code” was treated as a hard barrier.²⁸
• The Gaza Exception: In the case of Israel, the “Red Code” logic was inverted. Despite verified rocket fire near Ben Gurion Airport and union reports of crews engaging in “bomb shelter” drills upon landing ¹³, KLM management treated the suspension of flights as a temporary inconvenience to be solved.
• The “Larnaca Loophole”: To bypass union refusal to lay over in Tel Aviv due to safety fears, KLM implemented a “stopover in Larnaca” (Cyprus).⁴ Crews would fly AMS-LCA-TLV-LCA-AMS (or switch crews in Larnaca) to ensure no KLM personnel slept in Israel. This operational contortion involves significant cost and complexity. It evidences a desperate strategic desire to maintain the “air bridge” to Israel, a level of commitment that was never offered to Ukraine.

Conclusion: KLM treats Israel as a “Safe Harbor” ally, granting it operational leniency and assuming risks that were deemed unacceptable in the case of Ukraine. This prioritization of Israeli connectivity over standard safety protocols demonstrates that the airline views the connection to Tel Aviv as a political imperative, not just a commercial route.

5. The Security Industrial Complex: The ICTS/I-SEC Nexus

Perhaps the most structural form of complicity is the integration of Israeli securitization logic into KLM’s home base. The audit reveals that KLM’s passengers and operations at Amsterdam Schiphol are processed through a security architecture deeply intertwined with the Israeli defense establishment.

5.1 The Vendor: I-SEC and ICTS International

KLM’s primary security partner at Schiphol is I-SEC International Security B.V., a subsidiary of ICTS International N.V..⁵

• Origins: ICTS (International Consultants on Targeted Security) was founded by former members of the Israeli internal security service (Shin Bet) and El Al security. The company commercialized the “Israeli model” of aviation security.
• The Contract: I-SEC holds major contracts for “high-risk flight security,” “checkpoint screening,” and “profiling” at Schiphol.²⁹ This means that KLM passengers, particularly those flying to sensitive destinations or flagged by algorithms, are subject to screening protocols developed within the context of the Israeli occupation.

5.2 The “Schiphol Model” as Ideological Import

By contracting I-SEC, KLM and the Schiphol Group actively import the logic of Israeli securitization into the Netherlands.

• Profiling Methodology: The “Israeli model” relies heavily on behavioral profiling, which has been widely criticized by human rights groups for disproportionately targeting Arabs, Muslims, and political activists. By utilizing this vendor, KLM operationalizes this discriminatory logic.
• Normalization: The presence of I-SEC normalizes the idea that Israeli security expertise—honed through the control of the Palestinian population—is the “Gold Standard” for global aviation. This provides the Israeli security sector with both revenue and international legitimacy.
• Data Vulnerability: Recent intelligence indicates that Air France-KLM suffered a data breach involving a “third-party service provider”.³⁰ While the specific vendor in the breach was not named in the snippets, the heavy reliance on external security and CRM vendors (like I-SEC or Salesforce-based platforms) highlights the risks of outsourcing critical infrastructure to firms with complex geopolitical entanglements.

6. Internal Governance & Labor Friction

The internal friction between KLM’s management and its workforce provides the clearest evidence that the pro-Israel policy is a “top-down” imposition rather than an organic corporate consensus.

6.1 The Union Conflict (VNC vs. Management)

The Dutch cabin crew union (VNC) and pilots’ association have been vocal opponents of the Tel Aviv route resumption, creating a rare instance of open dissent against the “Smith Doctrine.”

• Safety as the Proxy for Dissent: Staff expressed fear for their safety regarding flights to Tel Aviv, citing rocket fire and the psychological toll of flying into a war zone.¹³ The union reported that colleagues “had to go into bomb shelters under loud sirens”.¹³
• Management Coercion: Despite these valid safety fears—which would normally trigger an immediate safety halt (as in Ukraine)—KLM management pressed to resume flights. The union reported that management agreed to make the flights “request only” (voluntary) but the pressure to maintain the schedule remained intense.³⁴
• The “Larnaca Solution” as Strikebreaking: The union proposed the Larnaca stopover to prevent crew from sleeping in Tel Aviv. Management accepted this not primarily as a concession to safety, but as a mechanism to keep flying despite the risks. It was a tactical maneuver to bypass the union’s primary objection (overnighting in a war zone) while preserving the strategic objective (connectivity).

6.2 “Neutrality” as a Disciplinary Tool

While the audit did not find specific public records of KLM staff being fired for pro-Palestine solidarity ⁴⁷, the corporate environment suggests a chilling effect.

• Uniform Policy: KLM maintains a strict uniform policy.³⁵ In the current climate, where the CEO has declared “I stand with Israel,” the display of Palestinian symbols (pins, kaffiyehs) would likely be interpreted as a violation of “neutrality” and “uniform standards,” while pro-Israel sentiment aligns with the CEO’s declared stance.
• The “Neutrality” Trap: Corporate “neutrality” policies are frequently enforced asymmetrically. When the leadership explicitly takes a side (Zionism), that side becomes the “neutral” baseline. Dissent against that baseline (Solidarity with Gaza) is then categorized as “political activism” and subject to discipline.

7. Lobbying, Soft Power & The “Brand Israel” Ecosystem

The audit examined KLM’s integration into the “Brand Israel” ecosystem in the Netherlands, identifying it as a key facilitator of Israeli soft power.

7.1 Trade Facilitation and The NICC

KLM is structurally linked to the Netherlands-Israel Chamber of Commerce (NICC) ecosystem. The NICC exists to “maintain and improve bilateral trade relations”.³⁶

• The Air Bridge: As the primary carrier between AMS and TLV, KLM is the physical enabler of the trade missions, delegations, and business travel promoted by the NICC. Without KLM’s connectivity, the NICC’s efficacy would be severely degraded.
• Affiliate Incentives: KLM runs affiliate programs explicitly targeting the Israeli market ³⁷, incentivizing websites and influencers to push KLM bookings to Tel Aviv. This commercial incentivization continues even during the conflict, normalizing travel to a state under investigation for genocide.

7.2 Cultural Sponsorships & “Artwashing”

• Seret Film Festival: The Seret International Film Festival (Israeli Film and TV Festival) operates in the Netherlands to “showcase the best of Israeli cinema”.³⁸ The festival is openly supported by the Israeli Embassy and relies on sponsors.³⁹
• KLM’s Role: While specific current sponsorship contracts were not exposed in the snippets, KLM’s corporate sponsorship policy supports “cultural heritage”.⁴⁰ Given the airline’s dominance on the AMS-TLV route and the necessity of transporting film talent and prints, KLM functions as a logistical partner for such cultural diplomacy events. These festivals are frequently criticized as “artwashing”—using culture to distract from political realities.
• Humanitarian Double Standard: KLM’s charity, “Wings of Support” ⁴¹, operates globally to help children. There is no evidence of it operating in Gaza to support Palestinian children, despite the immense humanitarian need and the airline’s proximity. This absence highlights the “Double Standard” in humanitarian engagement—charity follows the geopolitical alignment of the parent company.

8. Technology & Engineering: The Hidden Substrate

Beyond passengers and cargo, the Air France-KLM Group is enmeshed in a technological web that includes Israeli interests.

8.1 Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO)

AFI KLM E&M (Air France Industries KLM Engineering & Maintenance) is a global giant in aircraft maintenance.

• Defense Adjacency: AFI KLM E&M partners with major US defense contractors like AAR Corp ²⁵ and engine manufacturers (GE/Safran for the LEAP engine).²⁴ While no direct Joint Venture with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) was explicitly found in the provided intelligence, the ecosystem in which AFI KLM E&M operates—servicing fleets that may be used for state purposes and partnering with firms that supply the IDF—creates a risk of “downstream” complicity.
• Technological Integration: The Group relies on high-tech solutions for operations. While direct partnerships with the Technion (Israel Institute of Technology) were verified for Boeing ⁴², Air France-KLM’s partnership with TU Delft ⁴³ places it in an academic research network that frequently collaborates with Israeli technical institutes on aerospace defense technologies.

8.2 The Innovation Trap

The Netherlands is a key hub for “Start-Up Nation Central,” an organization connecting global investors to Israeli tech.⁴⁴ While KLM is not a listed member of the “Leadership Circle” in the snippets, its network ⁴⁵ and cargo facilities are the conduits for this tech transfer. The “Innovation Days” and tech exchanges promoted by the NICC ⁴⁶ rely on the KLM air bridge to function.

9. Conclusion & Final Risk Rating

9.1 Summary of Findings

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines is not a neutral service provider caught in a geopolitical storm. It is an active corporate participant in the maintenance of Israeli connectivity, legitimacy, and economic resilience.

• Ideology: The Group CEO has declared the defense of Israel a moral imperative.
• Operations: The airline deepened ties with El Al during a genocide.
• Policy: The airline applied a double standard to maintain flights to Tel Aviv while banning them to Kyiv.
• Security: The airline imports Israeli securitization logic via I-SEC/ICTS.

9.2 The “Complicity Scale” Ranking

FINAL AUDIT CLASSIFICATION: HIGH COMPLICITY

9.3 Recommendations for The Governance Auditor

1. Immediate ESG Red Flag: The July 2024 El Al codeshare agreement should be flagged to institutional investors as a material breach of “Conflict Neutrality” principles. It exposes the airline to legal risks associated with complicity in plausible genocide (ICJ ruling context).
2. Labor Safety Inquiry: A specific inquiry should be opened into the decision-making process that overruled VNC union safety concerns regarding the Tel Aviv route. This likely violated Dutch labor safety laws in favor of geopolitical expediency.
3. Supply Chain Transparency Demand: Shareholders should demand a transparency report on the “Origin Screening” mechanisms for agricultural cargo on the TLV-AMS route to determine the volume of settlement goods being transported.
4. Divestment from I-SEC: Pressure should be mounted to review the security contracts at Schiphol, questioning the necessity of utilizing a vendor with origins in the Israeli intelligence apparatus and a methodology based on profiling.

1. I Stand With Israel. There Is No Other Option. – Live and Let’s Fly, accessed February 1, 2026, https://liveandletsfly.com/i-stand-with-israel/
2. El Al / KLM Begins Codeshare Service From mid-July 2024 – AeroRoutes, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/240722-lyklcodeshare
3. KLM Suspends Flights to Ukraine: Airline – The Moscow Times, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/02/12/klm-suspends-flights-to-ukraine-airline-2-a76361
4. KLM announces 2024 summer schedule, accessed February 1, 2026, https://news.klm.com/klm-announces-2024-summer-schedule/
5. I-Sec International Security B.V., accessed February 1, 2026, https://ictsintl.com/holdings/i-sec-intl-security
6. New contract for I-SEC Nederland at Schiphol Airport, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.i-sec.com/news/new-contract-for-i-sec-nederland-at-schiphol-airport
7. Governance – Air France-KLM, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.airfranceklm.com/en/group/governance
8. Defence Minister Mr. Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos meets the Defence Minister of the French Republic Ms. Florence Parly – Hellenic Republic Ministry of National Defence – Υπουργείο Εθνικής Άμυνας, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.mod.mil.gr/en/defence-minister-mr-nikolaos-panagiotopoulos-meets-defence-minister-french-republic/
9. Meet the management of KLM, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.com.pa/en/information/corporate/management-klm
10. IMFC Statement by Jan Kees de Jager, Minister of Finance, Ministry of Finance, Netherlands; October 9, 2010, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.imf.org/External/AM/2010/imfc/statement/eng/nld.pdf
11. Meet the management of KLM, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.com/information/corporate/management-klm
12. French defense chief takes aim at US for ‘unanswered’ Iran attacks | The Times of Israel, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.timesofisrael.com/french-defense-chief-criticizes-us-over-unanswered-iran-attacks/
13. KLM renews Israel route, despite Dutch political pushback – DutchReview, accessed February 1, 2026, https://dutchreview.com/news/klm-renews-israel-route-despite-political-pushback/
14. Review of El Al Israel Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Tel Aviv in Business – Flight-report, accessed February 1, 2026, https://flight-report.com/en/report/75422/el-al-israel-airlines-ly336-amsterdam-ams-tel-aviv-tlv/
15. KLM company profile – KLM US, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.com/information/corporate/company-profile
16. AIR FRANCE KLM MARTINAIR Cargo – HomePage, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.afklcargo.com/IT/en/local/homepage/homepage.jsp
17. Gaza fall-out: Israeli agricultural exports face ‘collapse’ as world rejects products, accessed February 1, 2026, https://britainpalestineproject.org/gaza-fall-out-israeli-agricultural-exports-face-collapse-as-world-rejects-products/
18. Israeli agricultural exports face looming ‘collapse’ as world rejects products over Gaza genocide – Mondoweiss, accessed February 1, 2026, https://mondoweiss.net/2026/01/israeli-agricultural-exports-face-looming-collapse-as-world-rejects-products-over-gaza-genocide/
19. Made in Israel – Who Profits, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.whoprofits.org/writable/uploads/old/uploads/2018/06/old/made_in_israel_web_final.pdf
20. Our rates & conditions – AIR FRANCE KLM MARTINAIR Cargo, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.afklcargo.com/CH/en/about_us/conditions
21. AFKL Cargo – Compliance Compass, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.afklcargo.com/KR/en/about_us/compliance_compass
22. Restricted items in your small bag and hand baggage – KLM, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.co.il/information/baggage/restricted-items-hand-baggage
23. Restricted and prohibited items in checked baggage – KLM IL, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.co.il/information/baggage/restricted-items-checked-baggage
24. AerCap and Air France Industries KLM Engineering & Maintenance Enter into Exclusive Negotiations to Form a LEAP Joint Venture – PR Newswire, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/aercap-and-air-france-industries-klm-engineering–maintenance-enter-into-exclusive-negotiations-to-form-a-leap-joint-venture-302482507.html
25. AAR and Air France Industries KLM Engineering & Maintenance to form joint venture in Asia-Pacific region, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.aarcorp.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2024/aar-and-air-france-industries-klm-engineering–maintenance-to-form-joint-venture-in-asia-pacific-region/
26. KLM Sets Return Dates for Tel Aviv and Dubai After Regional Pause – The Media Line, accessed February 1, 2026, https://themedialine.org/mideast-daily-news/klm-sets-return-dates-for-tel-aviv-and-dubai-after-regional-pause/
27. Statement situation Middle East – Newsroom KLM, accessed February 1, 2026, https://news.klm.com/statement-situation-middle-east/
28. Ukraine allocates $592m to maintain flights amid fears of invasion – The Guardian, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/13/airlines-divert-flights-from-ukraine-airspace-as-invasion-fears-grow
29. ICTS International N.V. Awarded Major Security Contracts At Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (AAS), The Netherlands – PRWeb, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.prweb.com/releases/icts_international_n_v_awarded_major_security_contracts_at_amsterdam_airport_schiphol_aas_the_netherlands/prweb12365861.htm
30. Air France and KLM Confirm Customer Data Exposure in Third-Party Breach, accessed February 1, 2026, https://securityboulevard.com/2025/08/air-france-and-klm-confirm-customer-data-exposure-in-third-party-breach/
31. Air France and KLM disclosed data breaches following the hack of a third-party platform, accessed February 1, 2026, https://securityaffairs.com/180932/data-breach/air-france-and-klm-disclosed-data-breaches-following-the-hack-of-a-third-party-platform.html
32. Air France and KLM confirm customer data stolen in third-party breach | IT Pro – ITPro, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.itpro.com/security/data-breaches/air-france-and-klm-confirm-customer-data-stolen-in-third-party-breach
33. Zorgen over hervatting KLM vluchten naar Tel Aviv – VNC – Vnconline.nl, accessed February 1, 2026, https://vnconline.nl/zorgen-over-hervatting-klm-vluchten-naar-tel-aviv/
34. Zorgen over vluchten naar Tel Aviv – Wat doet de VNC en wat kun jij doen? – Vnconline.nl, accessed February 1, 2026, https://vnconline.nl/zorgen-over-vluchten-naar-tel-aviv-wat-doet-de-vnc-en-wat-kun-jij-doen/
35. The Evolution Of The KLM Uniform – Confessions of a Trolley Dolly, accessed February 1, 2026, https://confessionsofatrolleydolly.com/2025/10/07/klm-uniform/
36. Netherlands-Israel Chamber of Commerce: Home, accessed February 1, 2026, https://netherlands-israelchamberofcommerce.com/
37. Join the KLM affiliate program and earn commissions – KLM IL, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.co.il/information/corporate/affiliate
38. SERET Netherlands – Seret International Film Festival, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.seret-international.org/category/netherlands_25/
39. ABOUT US – Seret Film Festival, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.seretfilmfestival.org/about-us
40. Explore our sponsorship policy – KLM US, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.com/information/corporate/sponsorship
41. Explore our sponsorship policy – KLM IL, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.co.il/information/corporate/sponsorship
42. The Technion and Israel, at the Heart of a Global Revolution: Boeing Begins Developing Tomorrow’s Aviation Fuel in Haifa – Passport News, accessed February 1, 2026, https://passport.news/article/1747
43. The Air France-KLM Group becomes a major partner of the TU Delft-France Initiative, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.tudelft.nl/en/2023/university-fund/the-air-france-klm-group-becomes-a-major-partner-of-the-tu-delft-france-initiative
44. Startup Nation Central Leadership Circle, accessed February 1, 2026, https://startupnationcentral.org/leadership-circle/
45. KLM’s network and aliances – KLM US, accessed February 1, 2026, https://www.klm.com/information/corporate/network-alliances
46. Services – Netherlands-Israel Chamber of Commerce, accessed February 1, 2026, https://netherlands-israelchamberofcommerce.com/services/
47. King’s College London Withdraws Pro-Palestine Student’s Visa, Risking His Torture, After Pressure From Israel Lobby Group | Novara Media, accessed February 1, 2026, https://novaramedia.com/2025/10/22/kings-college-london-withdraws-pro-palestine-students-visa-risking-his-torture-after-pressure-from-israel-lobby-group/
48. MIT Student Barred From Campus Over Pro-Palestine Advocacy | Truthout, accessed February 1, 2026, https://truthout.org/articles/mit-student-barred-from-campus-over-pro-palestine-advocacy/