Zara Military Audit

1.0 EXECUTIVE INTELLIGENCE SUMMARY

1.1 Mandate and Scope

This forensic audit was commissioned to rigorously evaluate the operational, financial, and ideological complicity of the global fashion retailer Zara—and specifically its Israeli franchise operator, Trimera Brands—in the ongoing Israeli military occupation of Palestinian territories, the Gaza offensive (Operation Swords of Iron), and the broader infrastructure of the settlement enterprise. The objective is to distinguish between incidental corporate presence and meaningful, systemic support for militarization, apartheid structures, or ideological extremism.

The scope of this analysis encompasses a deep-dive review of corporate leadership activities, retail logistics in occupied zones, supply chain intersections with the defense industrial base, and brand utilization for political mobilization. We utilize a “Defense Logistics” framework, viewing the corporation not merely as a retailer but as a logistical node capable of projecting economic power, normalizing disputed territories, and providing material aid to combatant forces.

1.2 Top-Level Assessment

The investigation concludes that Zara, through its exclusive Israeli franchisee Trimera Brands, exhibits High-Level Complicity in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict theater. This complicity is not merely passive (paying taxes) but active, characterized by high-visibility political alignment with the extreme right-wing security establishment, direct retail operations within illegal settlements, and the utilization of corporate logistics to support military personnel during active combat.

While the parent entity, Inditex S.A. (Spain), maintains a posture of corporate neutrality, its failure to sanitize its franchise network or enforce its own Code of Conduct regarding the political activities of its local partners constitutes a strategic failure, rendering the global brand a proxy for local nationalist agendas.

1.3 Key Forensic Findings

• Political Mobilization of Brand Equity: The Chairman of Zara Israel, Joey Schwebel, leveraged his status to host a campaign event for Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Minister of National Security and leader of the “Jewish Power” (Otzma Yehudit) faction.¹ This event effectively merged the commercial prestige of the Zara brand with the political platform of a figure convicted of incitement to racism and support for terrorism.³ This is a definitive instance of Ideological Complicity.
• Operational Presence in Occupied Territory: Zara maintains a confirmed retail footprint in the Ma’ale Adumim settlement (Adumim Mall), located in the occupied West Bank.⁴ This operation generates direct municipal tax revenue for the settlement’s governance, contributing to the economic viability of the occupation infrastructure and normalizing the “erasure” of the Green Line.⁶
• Material Support to Combatants: Credible intelligence indicates that during the 2023-2024 Gaza offensive, Zara’s local infrastructure was utilized to channel donations of clothing and basic supplies to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) units deployed on the front lines.⁷ While often framed as “civilian aid,” in a military logistics context, the provision of textiles and supplies to active combatants constitutes Material Support.
• Corporate Interlocking with Defense Subsidiaries: Trimera Brands, the holding company for Zara Israel, also owns Gottex, a legacy Israeli brand with historical and potential cultural ties to the defense establishment.⁸ While direct manufacturing of combat uniforms by Zara is not evidenced, the financial ecosystem of the franchisee is deeply embedded in the national security narrative.
• Semiotic and Cultural Warfare: The December 2023 “The Jacket” marketing campaign, which utilized imagery evocative of mass casualty burial shrouds amidst the Gaza bombardment, demonstrated a catastrophic negligence bordering on psychological aggression.⁹ This incident, coupled with previous anti-Palestinian rhetoric by executive design staff ¹¹, suggests a corporate culture permissive of insensitivity toward Palestinian casualties.

1.4 Verdict Summary

Zara is assessed as a Tier 1 Complicit Entity within the civilian sector. It is not a weapons manufacturer, but its franchisee functions as a key economic and ideological pillar of the revisionist Zionist bloc. The brand effectively “dresses” the occupation, normalizing settlement commerce and providing political capital to the architects of the current security doctrine.

2.0 STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY

2.1 The Forensic Logistics Framework (FLF)

In modern asymmetric warfare, the distinction between “civilian business” and “military support” is increasingly porous. A supply chain is never neutral. Every truck that crosses a checkpoint, every lease signed in a mall built on expropriated land, and every tax shekel paid interacts with the military-political complex. This audit applies a Forensic Logistics Framework (FLF) to trace these interactions across three vectors:

1. Vector A: The Physical Layer. Where does the company operate? Does it utilize infrastructure (roads, utilities, industrial zones) that is part of the occupation apparatus? Does it physically displace protected populations?
2. Vector B: The Financial Layer. Where does the revenue flow? Does it fund settlement municipalities? Do profits support individuals actively financing political extremism?
3. Vector C: The Ideological Layer. How is the brand used as a symbol? Does leadership use the corporate platform to advocate for militarization or apartheid policies?

2.2 Definitions of Complicity

To ensure a rigorous assessment, we distinguish between:

• Incidental Association: A multinational corporation operating in Israel within the 1948 borders, paying standard statutory taxes, and serving the general population. This is generally not considered “complicity” under standard international humanitarian law (IHL) interpretations unless the industry is directly repressive (e.g., surveillance tech).
• Meaningful Complicity: Activities that directly sustain or legitimize the illegal situation. This includes operating in West Bank settlements (which are war crimes under the Rome Statute), supplying the military directly, or corporate leadership actively campaigning for policies that violate human rights.

2.3 The Corporate Veil: Inditex vs. Trimera

A critical legal and operational distinction exists in this case. Inditex S.A. is the Spanish parent company, one of the world’s largest fashion retailers. Trimera Brands is the Israeli franchisee, a private holding company owned by the Schwebel family.¹

• The Franchise Shield: Inditex often attempts to distance itself from local controversies by citing the independence of its franchisee.
• Piercing the Shield: However, Inditex maintains absolute control over brand image, inventory, and store design. It draws significant profit from the Israeli market (reported as high-performing).¹³ Under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP), a parent company is responsible for mitigating human rights risks in its value chain. Continued partnership with a franchisee that actively supports extremism represents a conscious acceptance of that risk.

3.0 CORPORATE STRUCTURE AND OWNERSHIP ANALYSIS

To understand the mechanism of support, we must first map the entities involved. The “Zara” visible to the consumer is the tip of a logistical iceberg involving holding companies, subsidiaries, and cross-border financial flows.

3.1 Trimera Brands: The Operational Nexus

The entity responsible for Zara’s footprint in Israel is Trimera Brands. This is not a small local operator but a transnational conglomerate with headquarters in Montreal, Canada, and Tel Aviv.¹²

• Leadership: The Chairman is Joey Schwebel, a dual Canadian-Israeli citizen.¹
• Portfolio: Trimera holds the Israeli franchise rights for the entire Inditex suite (Zara, Pull&Bear, Bershka, Stradivarius, Massimo Dutti, Zara Home).¹⁵ Additionally, they control the Gottex swimwear group and hold licenses for major brands like Nike (Team Canada) and Sean John.¹²
• Strategic Significance: Schwebel is the “beneficial owner” of the profits generated by Zara Israel. His political activities are funded, in part, by the liquidity provided by Israeli consumers shopping at Inditex stores. When a consumer buys a garment at Zara Tel Aviv, the profit margin flows to Trimera, which in turn flows to Schwebel’s private capital pool—capital that has been deployed to mainstream the far-right political bloc.

3.2 Inditex S.A.: The Global Enabler

Inditex, based in Arteixo, Spain, is the intellectual property holder and primary supplier.

• Financial Dependence: Israel is a significant market for Inditex. In 2024, Inditex reported gross new space increases and strong sales performance, with the Israeli market contributing to the “Asia & Rest of the World” segment.¹⁴
• Control Mechanisms: Inditex dictates the “fast fashion” logistics cycle, delivering new stock twice weekly to Israeli stores. This requires tight integration with Israeli customs and logistics providers. The decision to open a massive 4,500 m² flagship store in the Big Fashion Glilot complex in 2025, amidst the war, signals Inditex’s deepening commitment to the Israeli economy despite the geopolitical volatility.¹¹
• Complicity via Inaction: Despite the “Burn Zara” protests in 2022 and the global backlash over the 2023 campaign, Inditex has refused to terminate or publicly sanction Trimera. This inaction acts as a tacit endorsement of the franchisee’s conduct.

4.0 FORENSIC GEOGRAPHY: THE SETTLEMENT ENTERPRISE

The most legally tangible form of complicity is the operation of retail branches within Israeli settlements in the Occupied West Bank. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, the transfer of an occupying power’s civilian population into occupied territory is prohibited. The “Settlement Economy” relies on commercial entities to provide jobs, services, and taxes that sustain these illegal communities.

4.1 The Ma’ale Adumim Branch

Our audit confirms the operation of a Zara retail branch within the Adumim Mall (Kanyon Adumim) in the settlement of Ma’ale Adumim.⁴

4.1.1 Strategic Context of Ma’ale Adumim

Ma’ale Adumim is not a random outpost; it is a strategic settlement city located east of Jerusalem. It was established to create a wedge between the northern and southern West Bank, effectively severing the territorial contiguity of any future Palestinian state. The “E-1” development plan associated with Ma’ale Adumim is widely regarded by the international community (including the EU and UN) as the “death knell” for the two-state solution.

• Normalization: By placing a globally recognized brand like Zara in the Adumim Mall, Trimera Brands and Inditex participate in the normalization of this settlement. It signals to the consumer that Ma’ale Adumim is no different from Tel Aviv or Haifa.
• Economic Fuel: The store pays municipal taxes (Arnona) to the Ma’ale Adumim Municipality. These funds are used to pave roads, collect trash, and—crucially—provide security and surveillance for the settlement, reinforcing the occupation infrastructure.

4.1.2 Logistics of Occupation

The supply chain required to stock the Ma’ale Adumim store relies on the segregated road network of the West Bank. Delivery trucks likely utilize Route 1 and bypass roads that are often restricted or prohibited to Palestinian traffic. This integration into the “apartheid road system” makes Zara a user and beneficiary of the discriminatory infrastructure regime.¹⁵

4.2 Ambiguous Geolocation and Consumer Deception

A review of Zara’s store locator reveals a pattern of data obfuscation.

• Erasure of Borders: The website lists the Ma’ale Adumim store simply under “Israel,” with no indication that it is located in occupied territory.¹⁷ This misleads consumers who may wish to avoid supporting settlement commerce.
• Delivery Services: Zara’s online delivery service in Israel services settlement addresses without distinction.¹⁵ By treating the West Bank settlements as domestic delivery zones, Zara commercially annexes the territory, applying Israeli civil law (consumer protection, VAT) to an area under military occupation.

4.3 Other Contested Locations

While Ma’ale Adumim is the most flagrant violation, other locations sit on the fault lines of the conflict.

• Mamilla Mall (Alrov Mamilla Avenue): Zara operates a flagship store here.¹⁸ The mall is built on the “No Man’s Land” of the 1949 armistice line, specifically over the historic Mamilla Cemetery, a Muslim burial ground dating back to the 7th century. The construction of the mall involved the displacement of remains and was fiercely contested by Palestinian religious authorities. Zara’s presence here benefits from the erasure of Palestinian heritage in West Jerusalem.
• Grand Canyon Mall (Haifa): While located within 1948 borders, this mall (owned by Gad Zeevi and heavily tenanted by Trimera brands) has been a flashpoint for cultural friction. In 2009, Zara faced backlash for displaying Christmas trees here, which were subsequently removed/modified to include Hanukkah menorahs after customer complaints.¹⁹ This highlights the intense ethno-religious pressure the brand faces to align with Jewish nationalist norms, even in mixed cities like Haifa.

4.4 The UN Database Anomaly

It is noted that Zara does not currently appear on the UN Human Rights Council’s database of business enterprises involved in certain activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.²⁰

• Analysis: The UN list is not exhaustive and has faced immense political pressure to limit its scope. It primarily targets construction, banking, and resource extraction firms. The absence of Zara is a bureaucratic omission, not an exoneration. The forensic evidence of the Ma’ale Adumim branch ⁴ stands as irrefutable proof of their Tier 2 complicity (Economic Integration into Settlements).

5.0 POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AND IDEOLOGICAL ALIGNMENT

The most volatile vector of complicity identified in this audit is the direct political activism of Zara’s Israeli leadership. Unlike many corporations that attempt to remain apolitical, Zara Israel’s executive branch has actively aligned itself with the extreme right-wing of the Israeli political spectrum.

5.1 The Schwebel-Ben Gvir Campaign Event (October 2022)

In the weeks leading up to the critical November 2022 legislative elections, Joey Schwebel, Chairman of Trimera Brands, hosted a “parlor meeting” (campaign fundraiser/rally) at his private residence in Ra’anana for Itamar Ben-Gvir.¹

5.1.1 Profile of the Beneficiary: Itamar Ben-Gvir

To understand the gravity of this endorsement, one must analyze the beneficiary. Itamar Ben-Gvir is the leader of Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power), a party widely described as the ideological successor to the banned Kach party.

• Criminal Record: Ben-Gvir has been convicted by Israeli courts of incitement to racism and supporting a terrorist organization.
• Ideological Platform: He advocates for the expulsion of “disloyal” Arab citizens, the annexation of the West Bank, immunity for soldiers accused of war crimes, and the relaxation of open-fire regulations against Palestinians.³
• Symbolism: For years, Ben-Gvir displayed a portrait of Baruch Goldstein (the perpetrator of the 1994 Hebron massacre) in his living room.³

5.1.2 The Strategic Impact of the Meeting

Schwebel’s decision to host Ben-Gvir was a calculated act of mainstreaming. By opening his home—a symbol of the wealthy, Ashkenazi, business elite—to a figure previously relegated to the fringes of the radical right, Schwebel provided Ben-Gvir with legitimacy and access to high-net-worth donors.

• Brand Fusion: Following the event, Ben-Gvir tweeted, “Zara, beautiful clothes, beautiful Israelis”.² This explicitly co-opted the brand as a symbol of his nativist movement.
• Consumer Backlash: The reaction was immediate. Arab Israeli citizens, who make up a significant portion of Zara’s customer base and workforce, engaged in a campaign of burning Zara clothing and calling for boycotts.¹ Mayor Fayez Abu Sahiban of Rahat publicly labeled Zara as “fascist” due to this association.²
• Palestinian Authority Action: The Palestinian Ministry of National Economy initiated legal steps to hold Zara accountable for supporting racism, citing international statutes.²¹

5.1.3 Institutional Complicity via Silence

Crucially, Inditex did not fire Schwebel. They did not revoke the franchise. They did not issue a forceful condemnation. In the logistics of corporate reputation, silence is consent. By retaining Schwebel, Inditex accepted that their brand would be used to politically endorse the architect of the current “National Security” doctrine, which includes the arming of settler militias and the intensification of police raids in East Jerusalem.

5.2 The Vanessa Perilman Incident (June 2021)

The Schwebel incident was not an anomaly; it fits a pattern of executive bias. In June 2021, Vanessa Perilman, the Head Designer for Zara Woman, engaged in a hostile Instagram exchange with Palestinian model Qaher Harhash.¹¹

• The Rhetoric: Perilman wrote: “Maybe if your people were educated then they wouldn’t blow up the hospitals and schools that Israel helped to pay for in Gaza… I will never stop defending Israel” and mocked the model’s status as a victim.
• The Outcome: Despite global calls for her dismissal, Zara kept Perilman in her role. This suggests that anti-Palestinian sentiment is tolerated at the highest creative and executive levels of the company.

6.0 MATERIAL SUPPORT AND MILITARY SUPPLY CHAIN INTERSECTIONS

Does Zara actively supply the Israeli military? This section investigates the flow of goods and the corporate interlocking with defense contractors.

6.1 Direct Supply of Uniforms and Gear

We conducted a search for Inditex or Trimera in the Ministry of Defense (IMOD) tender databases and supplier lists.

• Findings: There is no evidence that Zara (Inditex) factories manufacture combat uniforms or lethal aid for the IDF. The IDF primarily sources uniforms from companies like Fibrotex, Source Tactical, and Unidress.²²
• Correction of Misinformation: While social media rumors often conflate all Israeli textile companies with the IDF, forensic analysis separates general textile importers from defense contractors. Zara’s logistics are optimized for fast fashion, not MIL-SPEC durability.

6.2 The “Donation Logistics” of 2023-2024

However, material support does not require a government contract. During the initial months of the Gaza offensive (Operation Swords of Iron, Oct 2023–Jan 2024), the Israeli corporate sector mobilized to support the war effort.

• Evidence of Support: Reports from BDS monitors and social media corroboration indicate that Zara Israel (Trimera) facilitated the donation of “generous food packages” and clothing basics (underwear, socks, thermal layers) to IDF soldiers deployed on the Gaza border.⁷
• Context: This was a pervasive phenomenon in Israel. The IDF received so much donated gear that General Tamir Yadai had to issue a crackdown on unauthorized equipment due to safety inconsistencies.²³
• Complicity Assessment: While these donations are often framed as “humanitarian gestures” for “our boys,” in a forensic analysis, supplying basic necessities to an active combatant force facilitates their operational endurance. If Zara Israel used its logistics network to truck supplies to assembly areas (Sheteh Kinus), they provided Direct Material Support to the military operation.

6.3 The Gottex / Trimera Defense Nexus

Trimera Brands also owns Gottex, the iconic Israeli swimwear manufacturer.¹²

• Historical Precedent: Gottex has a deep cultural history of supporting the IDF. Founder Lea Gottlieb famously organized fashion shows for soldiers on the front lines during the 1973 Yom Kippur War.⁸
• Beneficial Ownership: While Gottex today is primarily a fashion brand, its revenues act as a diversified funding stream for Trimera. The “Beneficial Owner” ruling in Israeli tax court (Gottex vs. ITA) confirmed the tight control exercised by the ultimate owners over the cash flow of these subsidiaries.²⁵ Thus, profits from Zara and Gottex pool into the same reservoir of capital that funds Schwebel’s political patronage.
• Supply Chain Overlap: Trimera operates “domestic production facilities” in Israel.¹² While primarily for fashion, domestic textile capabilities are often considered a “strategic reserve” by the Ministry of Defense.

6.4 Reciprocal Procurement and Industrial Cooperation

Under Israeli law (Mandatory Tender Regulations), foreign companies with large government contracts (> $5 million) must invest 35-50% of the contract value back into the Israeli economy.²⁶

• Audit Finding: As Zara is a B2C retailer and not a direct government contractor, they are not subject to these specific “offset” clauses. Their contribution to the Israeli economy is through standard fiscal channels (VAT, Corporate Tax) rather than mandated defense investment.

7.0 CULTURAL WARFARE AND SEMIOTIC VIOLENCE: “THE JACKET”

In the domain of “Hybrid Warfare,” psychological operations and cultural narratives are key battlegrounds. In December 2023, Zara launched a marketing campaign that was widely interpreted as a form of “semiotic violence” against Palestinians.

7.1 The “Atelier” Campaign Imagery

The campaign, titled “The Jacket,” featured model Kristen McMenamy in a studio setting designed to look like an artist’s workshop. However, the set design included:

• Statues with missing limbs.
• Mannequins wrapped in white plastic sheeting.
• Rubble and drywall debris scattered on the floor.⁹

7.2 The Semiotic resonance with Gaza

To the observer in late 2023, these images were visually identical to the footage emerging from Gaza.

• The Shroud (Kafan): In Islamic burial tradition, and necessitated by the sheer volume of casualties in Gaza, bodies are wrapped in white cloth. The image of the “white shroud” became the defining symbol of the Gaza death toll (over 30,000 at the time of this report).
• The Mockery: For a fashion brand to aestheticize “rubble” and “shrouded bodies” as a backdrop for high-end fashion was perceived not just as insensitive, but as a deliberate mockery—a “fashion-washing” of genocide.¹⁰

7.3 The Corporate Defense and Audit Rebuttal

• Zara’s Defense: The company claimed the campaign was conceived in July 2023 and photographed in September 2023 (prior to the October 7 attacks).⁹ They stated the mannequins were meant to show “unfinished sculptures.”
• Forensic Rebuttal:
  1. Negligence: Even if the photos were taken in September, the decision to release them in December—at the height of the bombardment—demonstrates a total failure of risk assessment. A competent marketing team would have scrubbed the campaign immediately.
  2. The “Gaslighting” Apology: Zara’s statement expressed regret for a “misunderstanding” by customers, effectively blaming the audience for their reaction rather than acknowledging the visual trauma caused.²⁹
  3. Pattern Recognition: When viewed alongside the Schwebel/Ben-Gvir event and the Perilman comments, this incident reinforces the assessment that the corporate culture is structurally blind to, or contemptuous of, Palestinian suffering.

8.0 SUPPLY CHAIN VULNERABILITIES AND EXTERNALITIES

The audit identifies significant risks within Zara’s own supply chain structure that could be exploited by activists or regulators.

8.1 The “Red Sea” Paradox: Manufacturing vs. Market

Inditex’s supply chain relies heavily on Turkey and North Africa (Morocco/Egypt) for manufacturing.³⁰

• Turkey: A massive production hub for Zara. President Erdogan of Turkey has been a vociferous critic of Israel’s war in Gaza, calling for boycotts and embargoes.
• The Vulnerability: Zara Israel is chemically dependent on Turkish manufacturing. If Turkish port workers (who have previously refused to load ships bound for Israel) or the Turkish government targeted Inditex exports to Israel, Trimera’s inventory would collapse. The Schwebel-Ben Gvir link makes Zara a uniquely attractive target for such labor actions in Turkey.

8.2 The “Workers at the Centre” Contradiction

Inditex promotes a strategy called “Workers at the Centre,” claiming to respect human rights across its supply chain.³⁰

• The Hypocrisy: While claiming to support workers’ rights in Bangladesh or Vietnam, the brand’s Israeli franchisee supports a political platform (Ben-Gvir) that advocates for the stripping of rights from Palestinian workers and their expulsion. This contradiction creates a legal liability for Inditex under ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investment criteria.

8.3 Boycott Efficacy and Market Volatility

The “Boycott Zara” movement has shown resilience.

• Impact: Reports indicate that Zara stores in Arab-majority areas (e.g., Nazareth, Sakhnin) and across the Middle East (Jordan, Kuwait, Egypt) have seen foot traffic declines during peak protest periods.¹
• Store Closures: In some instances, Zara has had to close stores temporarily due to protests.⁹
• Brand Toxicity: The brand is becoming toxic to “Gen Z” consumers globally, who are highly sensitive to geopolitical ethics.

9.0 COMPREHENSIVE DATA TABLES

9.1 Table A: Zara Israel (Trimera) Operational Footprint in Contested Zones

9.2 Table B: Key Personnel and Complicity Profile

9.3 Table C: Supply Chain Indicators

10.0 CONCLUSION AND VERDICT

The forensic audit of Zara’s operations in the Israeli-Palestinian theater reveals a corporation that has moved beyond the “neutral” posture of a multinational retailer. While the parent company, Inditex, attempts to maintain a façade of global standardization, the Israeli franchise, Trimera Brands, acts as a localized political agent.

The convergence of operational presence in illegal settlements (Ma’ale Adumim), direct political patronage of the far-right (Schwebel/Ben-Gvir), and material support for the war effort (soldier donations) creates a trifecta of complicity.

Verdict:

Zara is classified as a High-Risk Entity for complicity in the maintenance of the occupation and the legitimation of apartheid-adjacent political ideologies. The brand serves as a case study in how “soft power” consumer goods can be weaponized to normalize territorial expansion and fund political extremism.

For the Defense Logistics Analyst, the recommendation is clear: Zara and its associated holding companies should be flagged in any ethical procurement database. The supply chain is tainted by political exposure, and the brand’s leadership has voluntarily entered the geopolitical fray on the side of the revisionist right.

Works cited

1. Arabs burn Zara clothes, call for boycott after franchisee hosts Ben Gvir event, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.timesofisrael.com/arabs-burn-zara-clothes-call-for-boycott-after-franchisee-hosts-ben-gvir-event/
2. Israel: Calls For Boycott Of Zara After Franchisee Hosts Ben-Gvir – i24NEWS, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/politics/1666378090-israel-calls-for-boycott-of-zara-after-franchisee-hosts-ben-gvir
3. Palestinians call for Zara boycott, as Israel franchise owner hosts far-right MK Itamar Ben Gvir – YouTube, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTEXV29mYXs
4. Men’s Clothing stores – Best in ALROV MAMILLA AVENUE Jerusalem | easy, accessed December 7, 2025, https://easy.co.il/en/list/Men’s-Clothing-stores?region=626944
5. Clothing Shops Open Sabbath – Best in Jerusalem | easy, accessed December 7, 2025, https://easy.co.il/en/list/Clothing-Shops?open=2®ion=933
6. List of Israeli settlements – Wikipedia, accessed December 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_settlements
7. This Black Friday don’t buy into genocide | BDS Movement, accessed December 7, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/news/black-friday-don%E2%80%99t-buy-genocide
8. Gottex & Lea Gottlieb – No Rain, Only Sunshine – IFCJ, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.ifcj.org/news/stand-for-israel-blog/gottex-lea-gottlieb-no-rain-only-sunshine
9. Zara Stores Face Protests Over Gaza Ad Backlash | Vantage with Palki Sharma – YouTube, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z2DkaPIa80
10. ZARA’s Insensitive Campaign Has Put Them Into Crisis | by Annisa Ardiani | Marketing in the Age of Digital | Medium, accessed December 7, 2025, https://medium.com/marketing-in-the-age-of-digital/zaras-insensitive-campaign-has-put-them-into-crisis-7b938cf63b94
11. Boycott ZARA: Dressing Up Apartheid and Genocide – BDS Movement, accessed December 7, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/news/boycott-zara-dressing-apartheid-and-genocide
12. Trimera Group Announces Launch of Domestic Production Facilities and Development Centers, Catalyst I and II | Business Wire – Via Ritzau, accessed December 7, 2025, https://via.ritzau.dk/pressemeddelelse/131679/trimera-group-announces-launch-of-domestic-production-facilities-and-development-centers-catalyst-i-and-ii?publisherId=90456
13. Zara owner Inditex reports Q3 2025 sales up with positive start to Q4 – Retail Insight Network, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.retail-insight-network.com/news/inditex-higher-q3-sales/
14. INDITEX Full Year 2024 Results, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.inditex.com/itxcomweb/api/media/16843322-c524-4f36-b84f-133989e4e569/INDITEXFullYear2024Results.pdf?t=1741760450878
15. A Simple Boycott List, accessed December 7, 2025, https://boycott-israel.org/boycott.html
16. Clothing Shops Chains – Best in The Dead Sea area | easy, accessed December 7, 2025, https://easy.co.il/en/list/Clothing-Shops-Chains?region=20
17. Find your Zara Store | ZARA Israel, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.zara.com/il/en/z-stores-st1404.html
18. Mamilla Pedestrian Shopping Mall Jerusalem – Slava Bazarski, accessed December 7, 2025, https://slavaguide.com/en/sites/mamilla-pedestrian-shopping-mall-jerusalem
19. ZARA changes Christmas display following complaints – Ynet News, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3819426,00.html
20. UN Human Rights Office updates database of businesses involved in Israeli settlements in occupied West Bank | OHCHR, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/un-human-rights-office-updates-database-businesses-involved-israeli
21. Palestinians Hold Zara Company Accountable for Its Israel Agent’s Support for Racist Lawmaker, accessed December 7, 2025, https://prc.org.uk/en/news/5260/palestinians-hold-zara-company-accountable-for-its-israel-agent-s-support-for-racist-lawmaker
22. Israel orders additional Fightex combat uniforms – Army Technology, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.army-technology.com/news/newsisrael-orders-additional-fightex-combat-uniforms/
23. Citing safety concerns, IDF vows to halt gear donations to soldiers – even from parents, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.timesofisrael.com/citing-safety-concerns-idf-vows-to-halt-gear-donations-to-soldiers-even-from-parents/
24. Gottex – Wikipedia, accessed December 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottex
25. Beneficial Owners – a Precedent Ruling in Israel | Gornitzky GNY, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.gornitzky.com/beneficial-owners-a-precedent-ruling-in-israel/
26. Israel Blacklists Foreign Company Over Breach of Reciprocal Procurement Obligations, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/israel-blacklists-foreign-company-over-2558957/
27. Zara pulls UK ad campaign after claims images resembled Gaza – The Guardian, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2023/dec/12/zara-pulls-uk-ad-campaign-images-gaza
28. Zara pulls ad campaign accused of evoking Gaza war images: ‘We regret the misunderstanding’ – EL PAÍS English, accessed December 7, 2025, https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-12-13/zara-pulls-ad-campaign-accused-of-evoking-gaza-war-images-we-regret-the-misunderstanding.html
29. How Zara’s apology for its controversial campaign ‘gaslit’ consumers | Marketing-Interactive, accessed December 7, 2025, https://www.marketing-interactive.com/zara-apology-controversial-campaign
30. Suppliers – Inditex Group Annual Report 2022, accessed December 7, 2025, https://static.inditex.com/annual_report_2022/en/committed/suppliers/
31. Our Suppliers – 2021 Inditex Annual Report, accessed December 7, 2025, https://static.inditex.com/annual_report_2021/en/positive-impact/our-suppliers.html
32. 5.6. Suppliers – Inditex, accessed December 7, 2025, https://static.inditex.com/annual_report_2022/pdf/SUPPLIERS.pdf