IBM

1. Executive Dossier Summary

Company: International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)

Jurisdiction: Armonk, New York, United States (Global HQ) / Petah Tikva, Israel (IBM Israel Ltd.)

Sector: Technology / Cloud Computing / Artificial Intelligence / Defense Contracting

Leadership: Arvind Krishna (Chairman and CEO)

Intelligence Conclusions

The forensic intelligence assessment of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) identifies the entity not merely as a commercial vendor operating within the Israeli market, but as a foundational architect of the Israeli state’s digital military and administrative occupation infrastructure. The investigation, synthesizing military, digital, economic, and political audit data, concludes with high confidence that IBM engages in Material Complicity with the Israeli occupation and military apparatus. The depth of this complicity is not incidental or transactional; it is structural, spanning decades of integration into the core nervous system of the state’s defense and population control mechanisms.

Primary Finding: Architect of Apartheid Infrastructure

IBM, through its local subsidiary, designed and currently operates the Eitan System for the Population, Immigration, and Borders Authority (PIBA). This database serves as the central digital backbone for the Israeli permit regime, managing biometric data, residency status, and movement restrictions for the Palestinian population. The contract creates a direct functional link between IBM technology and the enforcement of differential legal rights based on ethnicity and geography.1 This is not a passive data storage service; it is the operational engine of the occupation’s bureaucracy. The system facilitates the fragmentation of Palestinian society by categorizing individuals into distinct legal statuses (e.g., Jerusalem resident vs. West Bank subject) and enforcing the complex matrix of permits that dictate daily life, movement, and access to resources.3 The forensic audit likens this role to historical precedents where technology firms provided the cataloging infrastructure for discriminatory regimes, notably the South African apartheid population registry.4

Secondary Finding: Operational Military Integration

IBM is not a passive supplier of off-the-shelf hardware. The corporation is operationally embedded within the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). IBM’s subsidiary, Red Hat, established the IDF’s “Operational Cloud,” a mission-critical infrastructure facilitating real-time command, control, and intelligence fusion between the Air Force, Ground Forces, and Intelligence units. Furthermore, IBM personnel are physically embedded alongside military personnel in IDF computing units, blurring the line between civilian corporate staff and active military logistics.1 This integration is critical for the IDF’s transition to “Multi-Domain Operations” (MDO), where the speed of data transfer between sensors (drones, satellites) and shooters (missiles, units) determines lethality. By providing the “containerized” cloud environment (OpenShift), IBM actively reduces the “sensor-to-shooter” cycle time, directly enhancing the operational tempo of the military.5

Tertiary Finding: Algorithmic Lethality and Future Warfare

The deployment of the IBM Defense Model, a specialized artificial intelligence system trained on military doctrine and optimized for air-gapped, classified networks, represents a shift from logistical support to kinetic enablement. This system is explicitly designed to “accelerate mission planning” and decision-making, directly enhancing the lethality and precision of military operations.1 Unlike general-purpose AI, this tool is fine-tuned on defense data (via Janes) to provide context-aware military intelligence, effectively acting as a digital staff officer. Its deployment in air-gapped environments signals its intended use for processing classified, operational data that cannot touch the public internet, confirming its role in the “sharp end” of military planning.7

Political Assessment: Ideological Double Standard

A comparative analysis of IBM’s geopolitical crisis responses reveals a distinct policy incoherence. While the corporation suspended all operations in Russia following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine to align with ethical standards, it has simultaneously deepened its operational support for the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD) throughout 2023 and 2024. This discrepancy indicates an institutionalized ideological bias that prioritizes strategic alignment with Israel over the consistent application of human rights due diligence.8 This “Safe Harbor” failure demonstrates that IBM’s human rights policies are selectively applied based on geopolitical alignment rather than universal ethical principles.

The intelligence indicates that IBM’s complicity is structural, intentional, and deeply entrenched, creating a high barrier to divestment and placing the company in the highest tier of complicity.

2. Corporate Overview & Evolution

Origins & Founders

IBM’s engagement with the State of Israel is historical and foundational, pre-dating the modern high-tech “Start-up Nation” narrative. The company’s presence was formalized in the years following the 1967 occupation, with the establishment of the IBM Israel Scientific Center in 1972 on the campus of the University of Haifa.¹ This facility was one of the first major multinational R&D centers in the country, established by Professor Josef Raviv, effectively seeding the local high-tech ecosystem. The establishment of this center in 1972 was a “groundbreaking step,” occurring at a time when Israel’s hi-tech sector was “almost non-existent” outside of the military industry.¹⁰

The evolution of IBM in Israel has mirrored the evolution of the Israeli military-industrial complex. What began as a hardware relationship—supplying the IDF’s first mainframe computer in 1967—has evolved into a relationship defined by advanced software, cloud architecture, and artificial intelligence.² The trajectory moved from mechanical tabulation to mainframes, then to personal computing, and now to the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” technologies of AI and hybrid cloud, with IBM consistently acting as a primary partner to the state’s defense apparatus at every technological pivot.

Assessment: Leadership & Ownership

Current leadership, under CEO Arvind Krishna, has maintained and aggressively expanded this strategic alignment. The acquisition strategy pursued by IBM leadership—specifically the purchase of Israeli security firms Trusteer ($630 million), Guardium ($225 million), and the massive acquisition of Red Hat—has served to internalize Israeli military-grade cybersecurity intellectual property into IBM’s global portfolio.¹¹

Leadership’s Recurring Engagement:

The corporate strategy indicates a deliberate reliance on the “Unit 8200” human capital pipeline. By acquiring companies founded by veterans of Israeli military intelligence (e.g., Trusteer, founded by Mickey Boodaei, and Guardium), IBM leadership has structurally integrated the technical output of the Israeli security state into its core value proposition. This is not incidental; it is a core business strategy that financially incentivizes the militarization of the Israeli tech sector. The leadership’s refusal to apply the same “Safe Harbor” exit strategy used in Russia to the Israeli market confirms an ideological commitment to the state that supersedes standard corporate risk management regarding human rights.8 Statements from IBM executives expressing “great pride” in enhancing the IDF’s capabilities further evidence a corporate culture that views military support as a badge of honor rather than a reputational risk.3

Analytical Assessment

IBM’s structure in Israel operates as a dual-use pipeline. The massive R&D presence (over 3,000 employees across Haifa, Tel Aviv, Herzliya, and Be’er Sheva) functions as an indigenous entity rather than a foreign subsidiary.¹¹ This structure allows IBM to bid on and fulfill highly classified Ministry of Defense contracts (such as the Nimbus tender ecosystem and the Eitan System) that require strict “Digital Sovereignty” and security clearance, roles typically reserved for domestic defense contractors.

Integration with State Interests:

IBM has effectively naturalized itself into the Israeli defense establishment. The geographical dispersion of its R&D centers—located near major academic and military-industrial hubs—facilitates a seamless transfer of knowledge and personnel between the military, academia, and the corporation. The “IBM Israel Scientific Center” (now IBM Research – Haifa) is located on the University of Haifa campus and maintains close ties with the Technion, ensuring a steady stream of talent often fresh from military service.10 This integration creates a symbiotic relationship: the IDF provides the training ground (Unit 8200), IBM provides the capital and global market access (via acquisitions), and the technology flows back into the Ministry of Defense through procurement contracts.

3. Timeline of Relevant Events

The following timeline isolates key milestones that demonstrate the escalation of IBM’s involvement from commercial trade to structural military and administrative integration. It highlights the shift from general hardware supply to specialized, mission-critical software and AI support.

Date	Event	Significance
1967	IDF Mainframe Acquisition	The Israeli military purchases its first IBM computer, initiating the digitalization of the occupation forces and establishing a vendor relationship that persists to this day. This marks the beginning of the “Magnitude” factor in the complicity assessment.2
1972	Haifa Research Lab Founded	Establishment of the IBM Israel Scientific Center. This foundational investment helped create the talent pool and technological infrastructure for Israel’s eventual high-tech/military-tech boom.1
2002	Guardium Founded	Founded by Israeli intelligence veterans; later acquired by IBM to secure sensitive databases. The technology is critical for monitoring “insider threats” in classified environments.14
2008	Strategic Server Contract	IBM awarded a 3-year, $60 million contract to supply servers to the IDF, cementing its status as the hardware backbone of the military’s data processing capabilities.1
2009	Acquisition of Guardium	IBM acquires database security firm Guardium for ~$225M. The technology becomes central to securing classified data for government clients and ensuring “Digital Sovereignty” compliance.13
2011	IMOD Storage Contract	IBM secures a contract worth “hundreds of millions of USD” to provide central servers and storage to the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMOD), scaling up the military’s data retention capacity.1
2013	Acquisition of Trusteer	IBM acquires cybercrime prevention firm Trusteer for $630M, establishing a major cybersecurity R&D center in Israel. This acquisition brings deep expertise in endpoint security, crucial for military networks.12
2017	IDF Operational Cloud	IBM subsidiary Red Hat establishes the IDF’s first “Operational Cloud,” enabling real-time data sharing between Air Force, Intelligence, and Ground units. This is a pivot to “Command and Control” infrastructure.1
2017	PIBA / Eitan Contract	IBM contracted to design and operate the “Eitan” Population Registry system, the digital backbone for the apartheid permit regime. This contract explicitly links IBM to the administration of occupation.2
2019	Red Hat Acquisition	IBM acquires Red Hat globally. In Israel, this solidifies the company’s control over the IDF’s open-source cloud infrastructure, making IBM the gatekeeper of the military’s software stack.5
2021	Nimbus Tender Participation	While Amazon/Google win the main cloud tender, Red Hat OpenShift is deployed as the hybrid cloud layer for IMOD and defense contractors (IAI, Rafael), ensuring legacy system integration.5
2022	Russia Market Exit	IBM suspends all operations in Russia following the invasion of Ukraine, establishing a precedent for ethical market withdrawal that it refuses to apply to Israel, highlighting policy inconsistency.8
2023	October 7 Response	CEO Arvind Krishna pledges support for Israel; operations continue without interruption despite the massive humanitarian crisis in Gaza. No suspension of military support is enacted.16
2025	IBM Defense Model Launch	Launch of a specialized AI model for defense, optimized for air-gapped networks and mission planning. This marks the transition to “Algorithmic Complicity” and potential targeting support.6

4. Domains of Complicity

This section provides an exhaustive forensic analysis of IBM’s involvement across the four assessed domains: Digital, Military, Economic, and Political. Each domain analysis tests the hypothesis of “Meaningful Complicity”—involvement that is integral, specific, and indispensable to the commission of violations.

Domain 1: Digital & Algorithmic Complicity (V-DIG)

Goal: To establish the extent to which IBM’s software, cloud architecture, and artificial intelligence capabilities provide the neural network for the Israeli military and administrative control apparatus.

Evidence & Analysis:

1. The Operational Cloud (Red Hat OpenShift): The Nervous System of Modern Warfare

The most critical finding in the digital domain is the role of IBM subsidiary Red Hat in constructing and maintaining the IDF’s “Operational Cloud.” The investigation confirms that Red Hat OpenShift serves as the foundational hybrid cloud layer for the Israeli military.1

• Technical Context: Red Hat OpenShift is an enterprise Kubernetes platform. In a military context, “containerization” via Kubernetes allows applications (like targeting software, drone feeds, or logistics trackers) to be deployed instantly across different hardware environments.
• Systemic Implication: Modern warfare, particularly the “Multi-Domain Operations” (MDO) doctrine used by the IDF, relies on the instant fusion of data from sensors (drones, surveillance towers) to shooters (missiles, aircraft, ground units). By providing the containerized cloud infrastructure, IBM enables the speed and interoperability of this kill chain. The audit reveals this cloud connects the Air Force, Intelligence, and Ground Forces.⁵ Without this containerization layer, the latency and fragmentation of military data would significantly degrade the IDF’s ability to conduct rapid, coordinated strikes. The cloud allows the IDF to push software updates to the “tactical edge” (e.g., a tank or a forward command post) in real-time, meaning IBM’s software is running in the field of combat.⁵

2. The IBM Defense Model (Algorithmic Militarization): A Digital Staff Officer

IBM has moved beyond infrastructure into algorithmic enablement. The release of the IBM Defense Model, powered by Granite foundation models and Watsonx.ai, represents a specific intent to service the warfighting market.

• Verifiable Evidence: The model is explicitly marketed for “mission planning,” “wargaming,” and “decision support” and is engineered to run in air-gapped environments.⁷
• Forensic Interpretation: The requirement for “air-gapped” deployment is a specific military signature. It allows the IDF to utilize advanced Generative AI within classified networks that are physically disconnected from the internet to prevent data leakage. This capability is critical for processing classified intelligence (e.g., target lists, troop movements) and generating tactical plans without exposing data to public cloud vulnerabilities.
• Lethality Implication: By using an AI model trained on “Janes” defense data to “accelerate mission planning,” the IDF can compress the “OODA Loop” (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act). In the context of the bombardment of Gaza, where AI systems have been implicated in generating target lists at industrial speeds, the provision of an AI model specifically designed to “identify patterns” and “support decision making” in a defense context constitutes material support for the targeting process. IBM is essentially providing a “private brain” for the military apparatus that enhances the efficiency of violence.¹⁸

3. The Eitan System (Population Registry): The Digital Architecture of Apartheid

In the civilian-administrative sphere, IBM designs and operates the Eitan System for the Population, Immigration, and Borders Authority (PIBA).

• Verifiable Evidence: The contract, valued at hundreds of millions of NIS and running until 2035, places IBM in control of the central database containing the biometric and demographic data of all residents under Israeli control, including Palestinians in the Occupied Territories.²
• Systemic Implication: This database is the “Master File” of the occupation. It stores the data that feeds the permit system, determining who can travel, who can work, who can access healthcare, and who is denied entry to Jerusalem. By maintaining the Eitan System, IBM is maintaining the digital turnstile of apartheid. The system categorizes individuals by ethnicity and religion, enforcing the differential legal statuses that are the hallmark of the apartheid crime.
• Operational Reality: This system interfaces with the terminals at checkpoints (e.g., Qalandia, Erez). When a Palestinian is denied passage, it is the IBM-managed database that returns the “Access Denied” query. IBM’s role as the operator (not just the developer) makes it a direct, daily participant in the administration of discriminatory movement restrictions. The longevity of the contract (until 2035) indicates a commitment to maintaining this regime for the long term.

4. Cybersecurity Supply Chain Integration

IBM’s QRadar SIEM platform integrates deeply with the Israeli cybersecurity ecosystem, specifically Check Point Software Technologies.1

• Significance: Check Point is founded by veterans of Unit 8200. By integrating Check Point’s threat intelligence into IBM’s global security products, IBM creates a dependency on the Israeli military-industrial complex’s output. This validates the “Unit 8200” brand and ensures that IBM’s global client base is indirectly funding the R&D of Israeli cyber-warfare firms.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: “Red Hat is open-source software; IBM cannot control who uses it.”
• Rebuttal: While Red Hat Enterprise Linux is based on open source, the OpenShift Container Platform used by the IMOD is a complex, proprietary enterprise-grade subscription product requiring ongoing support, updates, and maintenance. The audit confirms that IBM personnel are embedded with military units to support this software.¹ This requires active corporate consent, labor, and contract renewal. You cannot “accidentally” embed staff in a military bunker to support open-source code.
• Counter-Argument: “The Eitan system is a standard civil registry found in any country.”
• Rebuttal: In a democracy, a civil registry is administrative. In a belligerent occupation, a registry based on ethno-religious classification is a tool of control and demographic engineering. The data structures specifically enforce different legal statuses for Jewish settlers vs. Palestinian subjects. IBM’s design of the system to accommodate these discriminatory parameters constitutes active customization for apartheid, similar to its role in South Africa.⁴

Analytical Assessment:

High Confidence (Score 9.5). IBM is the operating system of the occupation. From the military cloud to the checkpoint database, the entity provides the essential digital architecture that makes the scale and speed of Israeli control possible. The “IBM Defense Model” pushes this into the realm of kinetic complicity.

Named Entities / Evidence Map:

• Red Hat Israel: Provider of Operational Cloud.⁵
• PIBA (Population, Immigration and Borders Authority): Client for Eitan System.¹⁵
• Check Point Software: Integrated partner in QRadar SIEM.¹
• Watsonx.ai: Platform for IBM Defense Model.⁷
• Janes: Data partner for the Defense Model.⁶

Domain 2: Military & Intelligence Complicity (V-MIL)

Goal: To determine if IBM provides direct material support to the warfighting capabilities of the IDF, distinguishing between general commercial sales and mission-critical support.

Evidence & Analysis:

1. Hardware Backbone (Servers & Storage): The Physical Foundation

While cloud is the future, physical hardware remains the bedrock. IBM holds contracts valued in the “hundreds of millions of dollars” for the provision of central servers and storage to the IMOD, dating back to major tenders in 2008 and 2011.2

• Significance: These are not office laptops. These are high-performance computing clusters required to process the massive telemetry data generated by modern surveillance and signals intelligence (SIGINT). The sheer volume of this hardware implies it supports the core data centers of the IDF (e.g., Mamram units). Modern AI and cloud systems cannot run without this heavy iron. IBM provides the physical substrate for the IDF’s digital existence.

2. Embedded Personnel (The “Shoulder-to-Shoulder” Factor)

The investigation identified a critical vector of “Proximity.” IBM employees are not just located in Tel Aviv offices; they are deployed within military infrastructure.

• Verifiable Evidence: Reports confirm IBM staff work “alongside military officials on updates and upgrades” for the Digital Transformation Administration.²
• Inference: This “embedded” status is the highest form of vendor complicity. It means IBM staff effectively function as auxiliary military technicians. In times of conflict, when systems require rapid patching or reconfiguration to support operational tempos, IBM staff are likely integral to maintaining system availability. This creates a direct link between IBM labor and military uptime. It raises profound legal questions about the status of these employees under international humanitarian law—are they civilians, or are they functioning as part of the military apparatus?

3. Supply to Defense Contractors: Enabling the Industrial Base

Beyond the IDF, IBM supplies its Red Hat OpenShift platform to Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).11

• Significance: These state-owned companies manufacture the munitions and aerial systems used in combat (e.g., Iron Dome, Spike missiles, Heron drones). By standardizing their development environments on IBM/Red Hat software, IBM streamlines the production pipeline of kinetic weaponry. Specifically, OpenShift allows these manufacturers to develop software for weapons systems faster and more reliably. It facilitates the “DevSecOps” (Development, Security, and Operations) pipeline for missile guidance systems and avionics software.⁵

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: “IBM sells generic servers; they are dual-use.”
• Rebuttal: The “generic” argument fails due to the embedded personnel. Selling a server is a transaction; placing an engineer inside a military base to maintain that server is a service. The latter creates a continuous stream of material support. Furthermore, the IBM Defense Model AI is specifically trained on military doctrine, removing any ambiguity about “dual use”—it is single-use: defense.

Analytical Assessment:

High Confidence (Score 6.5). While IBM does not manufacture missiles, it manufactures the digital logic and storage capacity required to fire them. The physical embedding of staff within IMOD units elevates the risk from “supplier” to “partner.”

Named Entities / Evidence Map:

• IMOD (Ministry of Defense): Direct client for storage/servers.²
• Rafael / IAI: Defense contractors utilizing Red Hat OpenShift.⁵
• Unit 8200 / C4I Corps / Mamram: Implied end-users of the “Operational Cloud” and embedded support.

Domain 3: Economic & Structural Complicity (V-ECON)

Goal: To analyze IBM’s role in the Israeli economy, specifically focusing on Strategic FDI and the extraction of value from the military-tech ecosystem.

Evidence & Analysis:

1. Strategic Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): The Anchor Investor

IBM’s presence in Israel is defined by Fixed Asset Permanence. The company does not merely rent sales offices; it builds infrastructure.

• Verifiable Evidence: IBM operates R&D centers in five locations: Haifa, Tel Aviv, Herzliya, Rehovot, and Jerusalem.¹¹ The Haifa Research Lab (established 1972) is a massive institution employing hundreds of PhDs.
• Systemic Implication: This level of FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) signals to the global market that the Israeli economy is stable and investable, countering the effects of the BDS movement. IBM acts as an “Anchor Investor,” validating the market for other multinationals. The Bank of Israel specifically cites such FDI as leveraging national growth.¹⁹ IBM’s sustained presence since the 1970s has helped build the “Silicon Wadi” brand, making the company a structural pillar of the economy.

2. Acquisition as Technology Transfer: The Unit 8200 Pipeline

IBM uses its capital to absorb Israeli military-grade technology, effectively monetizing the output of the IDF’s intelligence units.

• Key Acquisitions:
  • Trusteer ($630M): Acquired 2013. Focused on endpoint security. Founder Mickey Boodaei is a veteran of Unit 8200.¹²
  • Guardium ($225M): Acquired 2009. Database security.¹³
  • Worklight ($70M): Acquired 2012. Mobile application platform.²¹
• Inference: These acquisitions are not random. They target companies born out of the Israeli military intelligence ecosystem. By acquiring them, IBM provides a lucrative “exit” for military entrepreneurs, effectively subsidizing the R&D costs of the Israeli military. The capital injection ($1B+ in total acquisitions) directly rewards the militarized innovation pipeline. Furthermore, IBM then re-sells this technology back to global governments, normalizing the use of Israeli military-derived surveillance and security tech worldwide.

3. Supply Chain Cleanliness (The Aggregator Nexus)

• Audit Finding: A forensic review of IBM’s supply chain found Zero/Negligible evidence of involvement in the agricultural trade or the “Aggregator Nexus” (export of settlement produce).¹¹ IBM is a services/tech company and does not traffic in goods from the Jordan Valley. This is a crucial distinction—IBM’s complicity is high-tech, not agrarian. The company’s risk profile is entirely distinct from retailers or agricultural exporters.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: “IBM is just employing people; this benefits civilians.”
• Rebuttal: The R&D centers are explicitly focused on dual-use technologies (Cybersecurity, AI, Computer Vision) that flow back into the Ministry of Defense contracts. The economic activity is circular: IBM invests in Israel → develops tech in Haifa → sells that tech to the IMOD → profits flow back to IBM. The “civilian” benefit is secondary to the strategic military alignment.

Analytical Assessment:

Moderate-High Confidence (Score 7.2). IBM is a structural pillar of the “Start-up Nation” economy. Its massive acquisitions provide the financial liquidity that fuels the Israeli military-tech complex.

Named Entities / Evidence Map:

• Trusteer / Guardium: Acquired entities.¹²
• Haifa Research Lab: Primary R&D hub.¹⁰
• IBM Israel Scientific Center: Historical anchor (1972).

Domain 4: Political & Ideological Complicity (V-POL)

Goal: To evaluate IBM’s corporate governance, lobbying, and ideological positioning regarding the occupation.

Evidence & Analysis:

1. The “Safe Harbor” Double Standard: Policy Incoherence

The most damning evidence in the political domain is the comparative behavior regarding Russia vs. Israel. This serves as a litmus test for corporate ethics.

• Verifiable Evidence (Russia): In 2022, IBM suspended all business in Russia. CEO Arvind Krishna stated, “We chose to suspend operations so that we could evaluate longer-term options… As the consequences of the war continue to mount… we have now made the decision to carry out an orderly wind-down of IBM’s business in Russia”.⁹ IBM also donated $500,000 to direct aid organizations.⁸
• Verifiable Evidence (Israel): Following October 7, 2023, and the subsequent bombardment of Gaza, IBM maintained and deepened its contracts with the IMOD. CEO Arvind Krishna’s statement focused on “terrorist actions” and “standing with our partners,” with no mention of suspending military support or the humanitarian toll in Gaza comparable to the Ukraine response.¹⁶
• Interpretation: This proves that IBM possesses the capability to perform ethical market exits but lacks the will to apply it to Israel. This selective application of “Business Conduct Guidelines” constitutes an ideological choice. It suggests that IBM views the Israeli military occupation as legitimate business, whereas Russian aggression is illegitimate. This double standard exposes IBM to accusations of political bias and complicity in western-aligned atrocities.

2. Support for Settlement Institutions (Ariel University)

• Verifiable Evidence: IBM Israel has hosted mentoring events for Ariel University and provided access to the IBM Alpha Zone accelerator.²
• Significance: Ariel University is located in an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. It is a key institution in the normalization of the settlement enterprise. By treating it as a legitimate academic partner, IBM normalizes the existence of settlements. This is a direct violation of international consensus (and potentially domestic policies in some jurisdictions) regarding the illegality of settlements. It provides material support (mentorship, resources) to an institution built on confiscated land.

3. “Brand Israel” and Normalization

IBM actively participates in “Innovation Days” and trade promotion that frames Israeli technology as a global asset, deliberately decoupling it from the political context of occupation.8 This “Tech-washing” helps insulate the Israeli economy from political pressure. By promoting the “Start-up Nation” narrative, IBM helps obscure the “Occupation Nation” reality, effectively acting as a soft-power ambassador for the state.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: “IBM is neutral; it just follows US law.”
• Rebuttal: The Russia exit was voluntary and exceeded US sanctions in some areas. The engagement with Ariel University (a settlement institution) is an active choice that goes beyond “following law”—it creates a partnership with an illegal entity. The lack of a PAC (Political Action Committee) ⁸ mitigates direct bribery/lobbying allegations but does not absolve the company of the corporate political stance exhibited by its CEO’s unbalanced statements and the company’s operational choices.

Analytical Assessment:

Moderate Confidence (Score 3.54). While IBM is not a loud political lobbyist like some defense firms, its actions (Russia vs. Israel) speak to a deep institutional bias. The normalization of Ariel University is a specific red line that demonstrates a disregard for the distinction between Israel proper and the occupied territories.

Named Entities / Evidence Map:

• Ariel University: Settlement partner.²
• Arvind Krishna: CEO (Statement on Israel).¹⁶
• IBM Alpha Zone: Accelerator program.²³

5. BDS-1000 Classification

The following classification utilizes the BDS-1000 Complicity Assessment Model, integrating the scores derived from the forensic audit of the four domains. The scoring logic emphasizes the “Impact” (severity of harm), “Magnitude” (scale of operations), and “Proximity” (directness of involvement).

Domain Scoring Summary

The scoring reflects a weighted analysis where “Proximity” (direct involvement) significantly amplifies the base “Impact” score.

Domain	Impact (I)	Magnitude (M)	Proximity (P)	V-Domain Score
Military (V-MIL)	6.5 (Tactical Support)	9.5 (Massive/Decades-Long)	9.0 (Direct Operator)	6.5
Digital (V-DIG)	9.5 (Sovereign Cloud)	9.0 (Critical Volume)	9.2 (Direct Operator)	9.5
Economic (V-ECON)	7.2 (Core R&D)	8.5 (Systemic Importance)	9.0 (Direct Operator)	7.2
Political (V-POL)	6.2 (Inst. Legitimation)	4.0 (Modest Presence)	9.0 (Direct Operator)	3.54

Calculation Logic & Justification

• V-MIL (6.5): The score is capped by the Impact factor (6.5) because IBM provides the support infrastructure (servers, personnel) rather than the kinetic weapon itself (like a missile). However, the Proximity score (9.0) is near-maximum due to the embedded personnel.
• V-DIG (9.5): This is the dominant vector. Impact is near-maximum (9.5) because the “Operational Cloud” and “Eitan System” are the nervous systems of the military and apartheid apparatus. Without them, the systems fail or degrade significantly. The “IBM Defense Model” pushes this towards lethal aid.
• V-ECON (7.2): High score due to the sheer scale of R&D and FDI (3,000+ employees). The “Magnitude” is high because IBM is a top-tier investor in the economy.
• V-POL (3.54): Lower relative score because IBM does not engage in aggressive PAC lobbying or political donations, though the Ariel University link generates the score of 3.54.

Final Composite Score (BRS)

Using the OR-dominant formula with a side boost:

$$V_{MAX} = 9.5$$

(V-DIG)

$$Sum_{OTHERS} = (6.5 + 7.2 + 3.54) = 17.24$$

BRS Score Formula:

$$BRS\_Score = ((9.5 + (17.24 \times 0.2)) \div 16) \times 1000 \\ BRS\_Score = ((9.5 + 3.448) \div 16) \times 1000 \\ BRS\_Score = (12.948 \div 16) \times 1000$$

BRS_Score = 809

Results Summary

Final Score: 809

Tier: Tier A (Extreme Complicity)

Justification Summary:

IBM falls into Tier A (Extreme Complicity) primarily due to its pivotal role in the Digital Domain. The company is not a peripheral actor; it is the Operator of the Eitan Population Registry (the apartheid database) and the Architect of the IDF’s Operational Cloud. The forensic audit confirms that IBM personnel are embedded within military units, and its AI products are tailored for air-gapped combat planning. The contrast between its exit from Russia and its deepening ties to the Israeli Ministry of Defense confirms an ideological commitment that necessitates the highest level of scrutiny and action. The score reflects that IBM is “Too Big to Fail” for the occupation’s digital infrastructure.

6. Recommended Action(s)

Based on the Tier A classification and the forensic identification of “Meaningful Complicity,” the following strategic actions are recommended for stakeholders, investors, and civil society actors. These recommendations are designed to be actionable, specific, and legally grounded.

1. Targeted Divestment & Exclusion (Institutional Level):

• Action: Institutional investors (pension funds, sovereign wealth funds) must classify IBM as a “High-Risk Conflict Zone Entity.”
• Rationale: The evidence of the Eitan System contract alone—direct operation of a discriminatory population registry—violates the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines. Funds with ethical mandates regarding human rights, apartheid, or military occupation must divest from IBM equity and debt holdings. The “Safe Harbor” failure (Russia vs. Israel) should be cited as specific evidence of governance failure and policy incoherence.
• Target: ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) rating agencies should be lobbied to downgrade IBM’s “Social” score based on its operation of the permit regime database.

2. Public Sector Contract Termination Campaign:

• Action: Activists and legal advocates should pressure public sector clients (municipalities, universities, and governments) worldwide to review their contracts with IBM.
• Demand: “IBM must terminate the PIBA/Eitan System contract and the Red Hat IMOD cloud contract.”
• Mechanism: Since IBM has proven it can suspend operations for ethical reasons (Russia), the demand is for consistency. Public procurement policies often exclude vendors engaged in “grave professional misconduct”; operating an apartheid registry fits this definition. City councils can pass ordinances barring contracts with vendors that maintain population registries in occupied territories.

3. “Red Hat” Specific Boycott (Technical Community):

• Action: The technical community, particularly the open-source sector, should be mobilized regarding Red Hat’s specific role.
• Rationale: Red Hat trades on an ethos of “openness” and community. However, its proprietary OpenShift platform is the closed, containerized heart of the IDF’s kill chain.
• Tactics: Campaigns should target Red Hat’s developer conferences (Red Hat Summit) and community events. Developers should be encouraged to pledge not to work on OpenShift features requested by defense clients. The message should be: “Open Source should not build Closed Apartheid.”

4. Employee Mobilization & Whistleblowing:

• Action: Leverage the internal discontent evidenced by the “Double Standard” findings.
• Mechanism: IBM employees should be encouraged to demand the “Ukraine Standard” be applied to Gaza. Internal resolutions should demand the cessation of the IBM Defense Model AI deployment in conflict zones.
• Whistleblowing: Encourage staff in the Haifa and Tel Aviv labs to anonymously disclose the specific nature of the “updates and upgrades” performed by embedded staff for the Digital Transformation Administration. Specific details on the interface between the Eitan System and military targeting databases would be legally explosive.

5. Legal Accountability:

• Action: Legal NGOs should explore liability under domestic laws regarding the export of Dual-Use Technology (AI and Cloud) where there is a foreseeable risk of use in war crimes.
• Link: The “embedded personnel” finding ² creates a potential liability link, as IBM employees are physically present in the operational loop of the IMOD. Legal letters should be sent to IBM’s Board of Directors warning of personal liability for aiding and abetting potential war crimes through the provision of targeting-assistive AI (IBM Defense Model).

Conclusion:

IBM is a keystone of the Israeli occupation’s technological superiority. It provides the memory (Eitan), the nervous system (Red Hat Cloud), and the brain (Defense Model AI) of the apparatus. Removing or disrupting IBM’s support would impose significant logistical, financial, and operational costs on the Israeli military and administrative apparatus. Therefore, IBM is a high-priority target for economic and reputational pressure.

Works cited

1. IBM digital Audit
2. IBM military Audit
3. International Business Machines Corp – AFSC Investigate, accessed December 10, 2025, https://investigate.afsc.org/company/ibm
4. EFF Files Amicus Brief in Case That Seeks to Hold IBM Responsible for Facilitating Apartheid in South Africa | Electronic Frontier Foundation, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/eff-files-amicus-brief-case-seeks-hold-ibm-responsible-facilitating-apartheid
5. The Israeli Occupation Industry – IBM – Who Profits, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.whoprofits.org/companies/company/7236
6. IBM Announces Defense-Focused AI Model to Accelerate Mission Planning and Decision Support – Stock Titan, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.stocktitan.net/news/IBM/ibm-announces-defense-focused-ai-model-to-accelerate-mission-828rhb5pglnd.html
7. The ibm-defense-3-3-8b-instruct model card, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/watsonx/w-and-w/2.2.0?topic=models-defense-33-8b-model-card
8. IBM political Audit
9. Update on IBM’s Business Operations in Russia – IBM Newsroom, accessed December 10, 2025, https://newsroom.ibm.com/Update-on-IBMs-Business-Operations-in-Russia
10. History of IBM research in Israel – Wikipedia, accessed December 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_IBM_research_in_Israel
11. IBM economic Audit
12. Trusteer – 2025 Company Profile, Team, Funding & Competitors – Tracxn, accessed December 10, 2025, https://tracxn.com/d/companies/trusteer/__zSB0TfUOP6Et64A_w1beJW8saQktnZOPXigENPbLH-o
13. IBM Acquires Guardium, Gets Real time Monitoring and Discovery Tools – CMSWire, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.cmswire.com/cms/enterprise-cms/ibm-acquires-guardium-gets-real-time-monitoring-and-discovery-tools-006197.php
14. IBM to Buy Database Security Co Guardium for $225 Million – VC Cafe, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.vccafe.com/2009/11/28/ibm-to-buy-database-security-co-guardium-for-225-million/
15. The Israeli Occupation Industry – IBM: A Major Facilitator of Israel’s Surveillance and Security Apparatus – Who Profits, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.whoprofits.org/publications/report/158
16. War in Israel: A Message From Arvind Krishna – IBM Newsroom, accessed December 10, 2025, https://newsroom.ibm.com/War-in-Israel-A-Message-From-Arvind-Krishna
17. IBM Announces Defence-Focused AI Model to Accelerate Mission Planning and Decision Support, accessed December 10, 2025, https://canada.newsroom.ibm.com/2025-10-29-IBM-Announces-Defence-Focused-AI-Model-to-Accelerate-Mission-Planning-and-Decision-Support?asPDF=1
18. AP exposes Big Tech AI systems’ direct role in warfare amid Israel’s war in Gaza, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/ap-exposes-big-tech-ai-systems-direct-role-in-warfare-amid-israels-war-in-gaza/
19. IBM Calc
20. Trusteer – Wikipedia, accessed December 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusteer
21. IBM Acquires Worklight | Mergr M&A Deal Summary, accessed December 10, 2025, https://mergr.com/transaction/ibm-acquires-worklight
22. IBM starts to lay off employees in Russia three months after suspending business – Scroll.in, accessed December 10, 2025, https://scroll.in/latest/1025768/ibm-starts-to-lay-off-employees-in-russia-three-months-after-suspending-business
23. New Israel accelerator IBM’s first anywhere, accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.timesofisrael.com/new-israel-accelerator-ibms-first-anywhere/