Etihad Airways

Key Findings

• Economic: Etihad maintains documented passenger and cargo links with Israel, including commercial cooperation with EL AL and Israeli sales intermediaries. The Israel Airports Authority recorded 375,598 passengers and 1,829 tonnes of passenger-aircraft cargo on Etihad services in 2025.^{1, 2, 3, 4}
• Political: Etihad publicly promoted UAE–Israel normalisation through delegation flights, executive statements and route launches explicitly associated with the Abraham Accords. Its April 2021 inaugural scheduled service carried diplomatic representatives.^{5, 6, 7}
• Economic: DisruptAD, an investment platform affiliated with Etihad’s subsequent parent ADQ, co-led Aleph Farms’ completed July 2021 financing round. Its individual contribution was undisclosed; March 2025 reporting continued to identify it as a backer without establishing a fresh contribution or exact holding.^{8, 9}
• Not found: No public evidence identified of a direct Israeli defence contract, confirmed Etihad carriage of munitions, Israeli military digital-service provision or settlement-specific operations. A published investigation attributed four flight legs to Etihad, but shipment-specific carrier attribution and military end use remain unresolved.^{10, 11, 12, 13, 14}

Target Profile

Executive Summary

Etihad’s documented Israel/Palestine nexus centres on commercial aviation and its public role in UAE–Israel normalisation. The airline promoted trade and tourism opportunities following the Abraham Accords, inaugurated scheduled Abu Dhabi–Tel Aviv services in April 2021 and launched codeshare and reciprocal frequent-flyer cooperation with EL AL in July 2021. These arrangements establish passenger connectivity and commercial distribution; proposed maintenance, engineering, training and cargo workstreams must be distinguished from cooperation actually implemented.^{5, 6, 22, 1, 10}

The strongest economic evidence concerns sustained passenger and freight activity. Official airport statistics recorded 375,598 Etihad passengers and 1,829 tonnes of passenger-aircraft cargo at Ben Gurion Airport in 2025, compared with 100,695 passengers and 686 tonnes in 2024. Israeli representation through Maman Aviation and cargo agency services through Rom Top provide identifiable local commercial channels. A UAE aviation-authority statement confirmed continuing scheduled Tel Aviv operations in October 2026.^{2, 3, 23, 4, 21}

Parent-level investment adds a qualified economic relationship. DisruptAD co-led Aleph Farms’ US$105 million financing round in July 2021, before ADQ acquired Etihad Aviation Group. March 2025 reporting still identified DisruptAD among Aleph Farms’ backers, but did not establish its exact holding or contribution to subsequent financing. ADQ’s proposed Phoenix Holdings acquisition was cancelled and must not be counted as completed investment. The January 2026 L’IMAD consolidation establishes a superior parent grouping, without transaction-level proof that Etihad financed Israeli investments.^{8, 9, 18, 24, 25, 19}

The evidence does not support converting these relationships into verified military or digital assistance. A July 2025 investigation attributed four flight legs to Etihad, but did not publish shipment-to-flight identifiers sufficient to confirm its carriage of the two potentially corresponding consignments or establish their final military use. Canada disputed several wider allegations without resolving those consignments. No public evidence identified of settlement-specific operations or Israeli military technology provision. The fixed, human-vetted V6.5 result is BRS 483, Tier C (Substantial Complicity), with non-zero economic and political scores and zero military and digital scores.^{11, 12, 2, 13, 14}

Timeline of Relevant Events

Corporate Overview

Etihad is an Abu Dhabi-founded commercial airline incorporated in the UAE. Its disclosed UAE VAT group includes Etihad Airways PJSC, Etihad Aviation Group PJSC, Etihad Guest LLC, Etihad Airways Center of Excellence LLC and Etihad Aviation Training LLC. The corporate disclosure expressly states that Etihad Airways Engineering LLC ceased belonging to the Etihad Airways group in 2022; later engineering-company activities cannot automatically be attributed to the airline.^{17, 16, 15}

ADQ acquired full ownership of Etihad Aviation Group in October 2022. The government announcement also described earlier restructuring of ancillary aviation businesses. January 2026 consolidation established L’IMAD as the superior sovereign grouping; subsequent AD Ports disclosures independently establish that ADQ continued as an intermediate holding vehicle. These relationships support examining parent-level economic proximity, but do not establish that Etihad directed or financed each portfolio investment.^{18, 19, 32}

The Israeli commercial relationships are partnerships and representation arrangements, rather than verified acquisitions. EL AL is a codeshare and loyalty partner; Maman Aviation provides passenger-sales representation; Rom Top provides cargo agency services. No public evidence identified of an Etihad-controlled Israeli operating subsidiary, ownership of these partners or an Israeli beneficial controller.^{1, 3, 23, 4, 18}

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

The principal military-related item is the July 2025 investigation Exposing Canadian Military Exports to Israel. Its airline comparison attributed four involved flight legs to Etihad within a reconstructed network covering 47 shipments and more than 100 flights. This is a documented investigative attribution, rather than independently confirmed Etihad carriage of specified weapons.¹¹

The report lists two Calgary–Abu Dhabi–Tel Aviv consignments: a Novatel “Gps Receiver” to WaldyTech, departing 18 June 2024 and arriving 20 June; and an Inova Geophysical “NXT Fixture” to Niron Systems, departing 11 June 2025 and arriving 26 June. The two itineraries contain four potential air legs, matching the aggregate Etihad count arithmetically. However, the published tables do not explicitly associate those individual legs with Etihad.¹¹

The investigation describes defence-industry relationships involving the recipients. Neither commodity entry establishes ammunition, explosives, a combat-specific configuration, an ultimate military purchaser or installation in a weapon. The report’s interpretation of guidance and targeting relevance therefore remains distinct from demonstrated military end use.¹¹

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is the absence of shipment-specific carriage documentation and a verified military application. The published investigation supplies no relevant air waybills, flight numbers, aircraft registrations or carrier-issued delivery confirmations linking Etihad individually to either consignment. Routing through Abu Dhabi alone cannot establish the operating airline.¹¹

Canada’s August 2025 response disputed wider claims about projectiles, mortars and explosive materials aboard passenger aircraft. It did not name Etihad or the two consignments, so it neither confirms nor conclusively refutes their carrier attribution or technical descriptions. Subsequent Canadian regulatory reporting supplies aggregate export information, without an Etihad-specific determination.^{12, 33}

No public evidence identified of a direct Israeli defence contract, verified munitions carriage, military end-user certificate, Etihad-specific export-control enforcement finding, weapons manufacture or military-base support. The EL AL disclosures describe civilian aviation cooperation. The fixed Military score remains 0.00.^{10, 1, 11, 12, 33}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

Etihad has substantial civilian technology systems. It completed its Amadeus Altéa passenger-service migration in March 2023; Microsoft documented an enterprise data platform using UAE cloud regions; IBM described cloud-based check-in infrastructure. These implementations establish airline technology use, without establishing Israeli military, intelligence or settlement recipients.^{34, 13, 35}

The specific Israeli technology-sector connection is reported participation in Arieli Capital’s OnBoard accelerator in November 2020. The programme contemplated startup introductions, mentoring and potential commercial opportunities. No public evidence identified of a resulting Etihad equity acquisition, named Israeli software deployment or continuing participation beyond the original programme period.¹⁴

Passenger and employee biometrics also require precise attribution. Abu Dhabi’s Smart Travel announcement documented airport facial-verification applications involving Etihad; a separate SITA announcement described a cabin-crew biometric trial. Neither establishes an Israeli-origin supplier or Israeli-jurisdiction processing.^{36, 37}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

Technology use is not itself evidence of supplying technology to Israeli state-security institutions. The documented Microsoft platform affirmatively identifies UAE regions. IBM’s case study does not identify Israeli hosting, although the disclosures do not provide a complete present-day map of every Etihad dataset or processor.^{13, 35}

No public evidence identified of Etihad providing Israeli military or intelligence cloud, surveillance, cybersecurity, AI or biometric services; holding a Project Nimbus contract; operating Israeli data-centre infrastructure; or supplying settlement-specific digital systems. No public evidence identified of production integration of a named Israeli-origin product through the accelerator or another disclosed vendor. The fixed Digital score remains 0.00.^{13, 35, 36, 14}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

Etihad supplies passenger connectivity and cargo capacity involving Israel. Its EL AL partnership established codeshare distribution and reciprocal loyalty benefits. Rom Top’s appointment created an Israeli cargo-sales channel, while Maman Aviation identifies Etihad within its passenger-sales representation business.^{1, 3, 23, 4}

Official 2025 statistics provide the strongest operational scale evidence: 375,598 passengers and 1,829 tonnes of passenger-aircraft cargo, comprising 1,286 tonnes inbound and 543 tonnes outbound. These figures establish activity after the July and November 2024 legal developments identified in the audits; they do not identify individual passengers, commodities or end users.²

Additional cargo capacity was reported in August 2024. The UAE aviation authority confirmed scheduled Tel Aviv operations in October 2026. Separate 2026 reporting described expansion toward six daily services and company-attributed passenger and occupancy figures, which must remain distinguished from independently verified operation of every scheduled flight.^{29, 21, 38}

At parent level, DisruptAD co-led Aleph Farms’ completed US$105 million Series B round in July 2021. That amount is the whole financing round, not DisruptAD’s contribution. March 2025 reporting continued to identify DisruptAD as a backer but did not establish its participation in new funding, ownership percentage or retained investment value.^{8, 9}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

Commercial freight capacity does not establish settlement sourcing or military cargo. No public evidence identified of Etihad purchasing settlement-origin goods, procuring named Israeli agricultural products, owning a settlement facility or carrying a specific consignment to a named settlement. The available cargo announcements identify service capabilities rather than verified commodity origins.^{3, 23, 29, 2}

Parent exposure also has strict limits. The Aleph Farms investment predates Etihad’s ADQ ownership. ADQ’s proposed Phoenix acquisition was terminated; its proposed NIS 2.3 billion consideration is excluded from completed investment. A later NIS 184 million purchase of approximately 2% of Phoenix involved an unidentified UAE investor and cannot be attributed to ADQ or Etihad.^{8, 18, 24, 25, 39}

The L’IMAD consolidation does not disclose asset-level Israeli holdings or trace Etihad profits to an Israeli investee. No public evidence identified of a new, separately executed L’IMAD-period Israeli investment attributable to Etihad, Israeli sovereign-debt financing by Etihad or separately quantified Israel-derived profits. These limits accompany the fixed Economic score of 4.50.^{19, 32, 9}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

Etihad’s political nexus is documented through official promotion of normalisation. Its October 2020 announcement linked a tourism delegation flight to developing UAE–Israel partnerships and introduced a Hebrew-language website. Its November route announcement explicitly associated scheduled services with the Abraham Accords and bilateral trade and tourism.^{5, 6}

The April 2021 inaugural scheduled flight carried UAE ambassador Mohamed Mahmoud Al Khaja, Israeli diplomatic representative Eitan Nae’eh and then-CEO Tony Douglas. The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the service within expanding diplomatic, economic, political and cultural cooperation. This establishes institutional participation in normalisation, without establishing endorsement of specific military operations.⁷

Continued 2025 passenger and cargo activity, followed by confirmed October 2026 operations, establishes sustained commercial engagement after the legal developments identified in the audits. Those records do not establish the purpose of individual journeys or shipments.^{2, 21}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that the public statements concern civilian connectivity, trade and tourism. No public evidence identified of an Etihad declaration endorsing Israeli military operations or occupation, settlement sponsorship, military donations, anti-BDS lobbying or Palestine-related employee repression. Continued service alone cannot establish those additional acts.^{5, 6, 1, 20}

Safety-related cancellations and resumptions qualify any suggestion of uninterrupted operations. Etihad also transported humanitarian medical supplies intended for Palestinians in May 2020; independent financing or control of distribution by the airline was not established.^{27, 28, 31, 26}

Independent boycott petitions named Etihad in 2020 and 2026, but petition allegations are not independently established findings. The reviewed BDS Movement directory did not establish an Etihad-specific central campaign. No public evidence identified of an Etihad-specific settlement-database listing or settlement-related judicial determination. The fixed Political score remains 5.50.^{40, 41, 42}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Counter-Arguments

Etihad’s strongest overall defence is the documented civilian character of its business and agreements. Its EL AL cooperation concerns passenger distribution and loyalty benefits, while other proposed aviation workstreams were exploratory. The record does not establish a defence contract, settlement operation or military digital-service relationship.^{10, 1, 13, 14}

The cargo allegation warrants scrutiny but cannot sustain a verified weapons-carriage finding. Aggregate airline attribution, reconstructed airport routing and shipment-level commodity descriptions are separate evidence layers. Neither the investigation nor Canada’s response supplies the missing Etihad-specific carrier documentation or conclusively determines military end use.^{11, 12}

Corporate attribution must remain bounded. A cancelled acquisition contributes no executed investment; an unidentified UAE investor cannot be relabelled ADQ; a parent-affiliated investment cannot automatically become an Etihad-funded transaction. Humanitarian transport and safety-related interruptions also belong in the record. These countervailing findings are integral to the dossier and its zero military and digital scores.^{25, 39, 8, 9, 26, 27}

Complicity Index Score

Method: V6.5 - final, human-vetted values.

• V_MAX: 5.50 Avg_OTHERS: 1.50
• BRS Score: 483 Tier: C (Substantial Complicity)

Political normalisation activity and sustained institutional-commercial engagement provide the documented basis for the highest domain, Political; passenger, cargo and qualified parent-level capital relationships underpin Economic.^{5, 6, 7, 2, 8, 9} The supplied, fixed result is BRS 483/Tier C; unresolved military allegations and unestablished digital assistance do not receive positive scores. The method is scale-free, evidence-only and human-vetted; this compilation preserves the reviewed values without recalculation.

Methodology Note

• This dossier compiles only the four supplied domain audits. Documentary findings, investigative allegations, reported company figures and unresolved inferences retain their distinct evidentiary status.
• The scale-free dimensions are Impact (I): activity type; Magnitude (M): scale; Proximity (P): directness. The supplied final V6.5 scores are reproduced unchanged.
• The temporal rule mitigates divested or exited operations and excludes cancelled proposals from completed activity. Etihad Airways Engineering’s 2022 separation and the terminated Phoenix proposal are material attribution limits.^{15, 25}
• Entity attribution does not permit transitive guilt: commercial partners, unidentified UAE investors and parent-group investments are not automatically Etihad-controlled or Etihad-financed activities.^{1, 39, 8, 9}
• Verified settlement operations would dual-count under Economic and Political. No public evidence identified of such Etihad-specific operations in the supplied audits.
• “No public evidence identified” records the outcome of the reviewed checks, rather than proving universal absence. Unresolved carrier attribution, technical classification, ownership continuity and end use remain unresolved.^{11, 12, 9}