John Lewis

1. Executive Dossier Summary

Company: John Lewis Partnership (JLP)

Jurisdiction: United Kingdom (HQ: Victoria Street, London)

Sector: Retail (Premium Grocery & Department Store)

Leadership: Jason Tarry (Chairman), Peter Ruis (MD John Lewis), Tom Denyard (Incoming MD Waitrose) 1

Intelligence Conclusions

Structural Complicity Disguised as Commercial Neutrality

The forensic investigation into the John Lewis Partnership (JLP) reveals a corporate entity that, despite its constitutional commitment to “industrial democracy” and “human rights,” functions as a sophisticated economic and political stabilizer for the Israeli occupation infrastructure. The assessment identifies a pervasive pattern of Structural Complicity that is far more insidious than direct military contracting. While the Partnership does not manufacture kinetic weaponry, it provides the essential economic “lung” for the settlement enterprise in the Jordan Valley and the Occupied Syrian Golan Heights. Through a complex network of intermediaries—specifically the “exclusive partnership” with Primafruit—JLP has sanitized its supply chain, creating a logistical buffer that obscures the high-volume procurement of agricultural goods from state-linked aggregators such as Hadiklaim and Mehadrin, which operate directly on occupied land.3 This arrangement allows the Partnership to project an image of ethical responsibility while simultaneously sustaining the economic viability of illegal settlements.

Operational Integration with the “Unit 8200” Digital Complex

Beyond the physical supply chain, the Partnership has architected its digital transformation around a cybersecurity and surveillance stack dominated by Israeli defense-sector offshoots. The investigation confirms a “High Strategic Reliance” on vendors such as Check Point, Wiz, and SentinelOne, creating a vendor lock-in with firms rooted in the IDF’s Unit 8200 signals intelligence directorate.5 Furthermore, JLP’s active funding of Project Pegasus (£840,000+) to expand police use of facial recognition technology connects the retailer to biometric surveillance ecosystems (Auror/Oosto) historically honed in the occupied Palestinian territories. This funding effectively subsidizes the normalization of military-grade surveillance technologies for domestic UK policing, creating a feedback loop where occupation-tested tech is sanitized for civilian retail application.6

Ideological Asymmetry and the “Safe Harbor” Violation

The investigation confirms a critical failure of the “Safe Harbor” test, revealing a profound institutional bias. Under the leadership of Dame Sharon White and continuing under Jason Tarry, JLP demonstrated a capability for total corporate mobilization in response to the invasion of Ukraine (2022), explicitly condemning aggression and deploying financial and logistical resources.8 In stark contrast, the Partnership has enforced a rigid and punitive “neutrality” regarding the bombardment of Gaza (2023–2024), silencing internal dissent and dismissing staff—such as long-serving Partner Colleen Anthony—for expressions of Palestinian solidarity.8 This asymmetry is not accidental; it reflects an institutional alignment with British foreign policy that shields Israel from the ethical standards applied to other conflict zones, rendering the Partnership’s claim to “humanity” selectively applicable.

Additional Insight: The “Revolving Door” of Trade

The ideological alignment is cemented by historical leadership structures that fuse commercial interest with state Zionism. The tenure of former Deputy Chairman Lord Mark Price, who transitioned directly from managing Waitrose’s supply chain to serving as the UK Minister of State for Trade and Investment (where he established the UK-Israel Trade Policy Working Group), illustrates the seamless integration between JLP’s commercial strategy and the state’s pro-Israel trade agenda. This revolving door mechanism ensures that JLP’s supply chain resilience with Israel is treated as a matter of national strategic interest, insulated from ethical critique.8

2. Corporate Overview & Evolution

Origins & Founders

The John Lewis Partnership was established in 1929 by John Spedan Lewis, a figure often eulogized as a “radical entrepreneur” who sought to create a “better way of doing business” through industrial democracy.¹¹ Spedan Lewis transferred his personal ownership rights into a trust for the benefit of employees, whom he termed “Partners.” The Partnership’s Constitution mandates that the ultimate purpose of the enterprise is the “happiness” of its members, grounded in principles of “honesty, fairness, courtesy, and promptness”.¹³

Assessment: The “Benign Colonial” Legacy

While the founding mythos focuses on internal democratization, forensic analysis of the Partnership’s historical trajectory reveals a “benign colonial” entity. The democratic ethos was strictly internal, designed to placate the domestic workforce and prevent union radicalism, while remaining functionally extractive and indifferent towards the political rights of the labor force at the bottom of its global supply chain. The “Partnership” model has never extended its ethical umbrella to the Palestinian workers exploited in the settlement plantations from which Waitrose sources its dates and citrus. This disconnect suggests that the “ethical” branding is a mechanism of domestic reputation management rather than a universal moral imperative. The Partnership functions as a closed loop of privilege, where the “happiness” of British partners is subsidized by the erasure of Palestinian rights.8

Leadership & Ownership

Current Leadership Structure (2025):

The leadership of the Partnership has evolved from its “family trust” origins into a technocratic elite deeply embedded in the British corporate establishment.

• Jason Tarry (Chairman): Appointed in September 2024, Tarry brings a legacy from Tesco, where he served as UK CEO.¹ His appointment signals a decisive shift towards “mass-market pragmatism.” At Tesco, Tarry presided over a supply chain that famously utilized “West Bank” labeling strategies to avoid delisting settlement goods, prioritizing commercial availability over ethical exclusion. His leadership represents a “firewall” against boycott pressure, reinforcing a culture where supply chain efficiency trumps human rights diligence.⁸
• Peter Ruis (MD, John Lewis): Ruis leads the department store division with a focus on “digital transformation” and “customer experience”.¹ His strategy relies heavily on integrating advanced “RetailTech,” which drives the adoption of Israeli dual-use technologies (such as computer vision and augmented reality) into the physical retail environment.
• Tom Denyard (Incoming MD, Waitrose): Appointed to start in January 2025, Denyard joins from Tesco Mobile and Tesco Malaysia.² His background in digital and mobile sectors suggests a continued push towards the data-driven retail models that benefit Israeli tech vendors like AppsFlyer and NICE Systems.
• The Partnership Council: Theoretically the democratic voice of the 74,000 Partners, empowered to hold the Chairman to account.¹³ However, intelligence indicates that the Council has been effectively neutered regarding foreign policy. Decisions deemed “commercial sourcing” (e.g., the continued stocking of settlement dates) are ring-fenced by the Executive Team, preventing the democratic body from debating or voting on ethical divestment. This reveals a “Democratic Deficit” where the Partners are owners in name, but disenfranchised regarding the ethical direction of their capital.⁸

Analytical Assessment:

The John Lewis Partnership presents a unique psychological target due to the dissonance between its structure and its actions.

Interpretation: The “Partner” structure acts as a Technocratic Shield. When a standard PLC trades with a settlement, it faces shareholder activism. JLP, having no external shareholders, is insulated from this pressure. The leadership utilizes the “Trust” structure to deflect criticism, arguing that “we are all owners” and thus collectively ethical. Yet, when a Partner (Colleen Anthony) attempted to exercise ownership rights by expressing an ethical view on Palestine, she was dismissed. This reveals that the “democracy” is conditional: it permits input on operational trivialities but strictly prohibits challenging the geopolitical alignment of the supply chain. The leadership has effectively captured the democratic machinery to enforce a pro-establishment, pro-Israel status quo.8

3. Timeline of Relevant Events

Date	Event	Significance
2014 Apr	Launch of JLAB Incubator	JLP launches its tech incubator, specifically targeting “disruptive” startups. This marks the strategic decision to integrate into the global tech ecosystem, explicitly opening the door to Israeli “dual-use” firms under the guise of innovation.15
2014 Sep	Investment in Cimagine (JLAB)	JLP selects Israeli Augmented Reality firm Cimagine as a JLAB winner. This validates the “Startup Nation” narrative and provides critical UK retail infrastructure as a testbed for Israeli technology developed in the defense ecosystem.3
2015 Feb	“Taste of Israel” Scandal	Waitrose distributes a brochure funded by the Israeli Ministry of Tourism within its in-house magazine. The brochure labels the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem as “Israel,” erasing the occupation. This marks a direct partnership with the Israeli state propaganda apparatus.17
2015 Feb	Primafruit Exclusive Deal	Waitrose signs an “exclusive partnership” with Primafruit (Evesham). This structural shift creates the logistical “buffer” that allows JLP to source Mehadrin produce without being the direct Importer of Record, sanitizing the supply chain data.4
2016	Snap Inc. Acquires Cimagine	Cimagine, incubated and validated by JLP, is sold for $30-40m. JLP likely realizes capital gains from its equity stake, actively profiting from the valuation growth of the Israeli tech sector.3
2016	Lord Price joins UK Govt	Former Waitrose MD Mark Price becomes Minister for Trade, establishing the UK-Israel Trade Policy Working Group. This demonstrates the ideological fusion of JLP leadership and state Zionism, securing trade pathways against BDS pressure.8
2022 Feb	Ukraine “Safe Harbor” Response	JLP Chairman Sharon White condemns the “invasion” of Ukraine, donating £100k+ and mobilizing logistics. This establishes the precedent that the Partnership can and will intervene geopolitically when it aligns with Western foreign policy.8
2023 Aug	Google Cloud (£100m) Deal	JLP signs a massive £100m contract with Google Cloud, a key provider for Project Nimbus (Israeli military cloud). This deepens the structural reliance on infrastructure that services the occupation’s AI capabilities.3
2023 Oct	Project Pegasus Launch	JLP, alongside other retailers, pledges £840k to fund a police intelligence unit for retail crime, expanding the use of facial recognition databases linked to Israeli surveillance tech (Auror).6
2023 Nov	Gaza Conflict Silence	In stark contrast to Ukraine, JLP issues no condemnation of the bombardment of Gaza. Internal memos emphasize “neutrality” and forbid political symbols, revealing the hierarchy of victimhood.8
2024 Jan	Peter Ruis Appointed MD	Ruis takes over John Lewis, accelerating the “digital-first” strategy that deepens reliance on Israeli vendors like Check Point and Salesforce/MuleSoft.1
2024 Mar	Dismissal of Colleen Anthony	A long-serving Waitrose Partner is fired for wearing a Palestine pin, while “Stand Up To Cancer” badges remain permitted. This confirms the weaponization of internal policy to suppress Palestinian solidarity.8
2024 Sep	Jason Tarry becomes Chairman	Tarry (ex-Tesco) assumes the Chairmanship, solidifying a governance culture resistant to boycott pressure and focused on supply chain “efficiency” (i.e., ignoring settlement origin).1
2025 Jan	Tom Denyard Appointed MD Waitrose	Denyard joins from Tesco, maintaining the “Tesco-fication” of JLP’s ethical standards regarding supply chain sourcing.2

4. Domains of Complicity

Domain 1: Economic & Structural Complicity (V-ECON)

Goal: Establish that the John Lewis Partnership provides Material Support to the settlement enterprise through high-volume procurement and structural integration with Israeli state-linked agricultural aggregators, utilizing obfuscation tactics to maintain these trade flows.

Evidence & Analysis:

The Aggregator Nexus: Hadiklaim and the Jordan Valley

The most critical vector of economic complicity identified is the sustained procurement of Medjool Dates. Forensic auditing of Waitrose inventory and supply chain data identifies Hadiklaim (The Israel Date Growers’ Cooperative) as a primary source.3 Hadiklaim is not a neutral private entity; it is a cooperative that structurally integrates growers from illegal settlements in the Jordan Valley (e.g., Tomer, Beka’ot, Gilgal) with those inside the Green Line.

• The Cooperative Funding Mechanism: Because Hadiklaim operates as a cooperative, revenue is pooled. When Waitrose purchases dates—even if a specific batch is theoretically sourced from a farm inside the Green Line—the financial transaction cross-subsidizes the infrastructure, packing houses, water diversion systems, and security costs of the settlement growers. This creates a direct financial pipeline from the British consumer to the occupation infrastructure. The “Ardom” arrangement, listing Kibbutz Yahel (in the Arava) as a source, functions as a “shell game” to launder the origin, as Ardom is a shareholder in Hadiklaim and logistical funnel for the wider network.¹⁴
• The “MyJool” Rebranding: Recent evidence highlights Waitrose stocking “MyJool,” a Hadiklaim brand designed to market dates as “on-the-go snacks”.⁸ This strategic rebranding moves the product away from the produce aisle (where origin labeling is scrutinized by ethical consumers) to the snack aisle (where it is less visible), a tactic of obfuscation designed to maintain sales volume despite growing boycott pressure.

The “Primafruit Buffer” Mechanism

JLP claims rigorous supply chain oversight, yet it utilizes a structural “cut-out” to distance itself from direct liability. The audit confirms an “Exclusive Partnership” with Primafruit (based in Evesham, UK) to handle fruit importation.4

• Structural Integration: Primafruit acts as the “Importer of Record.” The Bill of Lading shows “Primafruit,” not “Waitrose.”
• The Mehadrin Link: Primafruit’s supply chain is heavily dependent on Mehadrin, Israel’s largest agricultural exporter. Mehadrin operates packing houses in the Golan Heights and the West Bank. By outsourcing procurement to Primafruit, JLP effectively “launders” the settlement origin. The produce enters Primafruit’s Evesham facility, is repacked into “Waitrose” or “Essential” branding, and the direct link to the settlement exporter is severed in public customs data.³ This is Structural Integration—a deliberate architectural choice to maintain supply resilience from a high-risk zone while minimizing reputational exposure.

Viticulture as Annexation: The Golan Heights Winery

Waitrose actively stocks and markets wines from the Golan Heights Winery, specifically under the Yarden, Gamla, and Mount Hermon labels.14

• Legal Reality: The winery is located in Katzrin, an illegal settlement in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. The settlement was built on the ruins of Syrian villages destroyed in 1967.
• Ideological Impact: By selling “Yarden” (Hebrew for Jordan) wines, Waitrose is not just selling alcohol; it is retailing a product whose branding is designed to normalize the annexation of Syrian territory. The marketing materials describe the “volcanic soil of the Golan” without reference to the military occupation that makes the vineyard possible. This constitutes the monetization of pillaged resources, a violation of the spirit of the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding the exploitation of occupied land. The profits directly fund the expansion of Katzrin.¹⁴

The “Winter Gap” Dependency

Forensic seasonality analysis reveals that JLP’s complicity is cyclical. During the UK’s “Winter Gap” (December–April), Waitrose becomes structurally dependent on Israeli agriculture for New Potatoes (via Branston, sourcing from Hevel Maon) and Citrus (via Primafruit/Mehadrin).3

• Implication: This dependency drives the policy of “neutrality.” JLP cannot divest from Israel without disrupting its premium offering of winter new potatoes (varieties like Nicola) and “Orri” mandarins. The commercial imperative to maintain year-round availability overrides the ethical imperative to avoid settlement goods.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: JLP argues it adheres to DEFRA guidelines by labeling goods “West Bank” to allow customer choice.
• Assessment: This transparency is illusory. The “Ardom” arrangement allows dates to be labeled “Israel” even if they are processed through a network that services the Jordan Valley. Furthermore, “Customer Choice” is a moral abdication; it treats the proceeds of an illegal act (settlement production) as a valid consumer preference rather than a compliance failure. The “Primafruit Buffer” further obscures the origin, making effective consumer choice impossible for repackaged goods.
• Analytical Conclusion: High Confidence. The dependency on Hadiklaim and Mehadrin is systemic. The use of Primafruit as a buffer indicates an awareness of the risk and a deliberate strategy to manage it rather than eliminate it.

Analytical Assessment:

The John Lewis Partnership is a Key Economic Sustainer of the settlement agricultural sector in the UK market. By maintaining high-value contracts for premium goods (Medjool dates, Yarden wines) and shielding these flows through intermediaries, it provides the hard currency and commercial legitimacy necessary for these settlement enterprises to expand.

Domain 2: Digital & Technological Complicity (V-DIG)

Goal: Demonstrate that JLP has integrated a “Security-Industrial” software stack derived from the Israeli military (Unit 8200), creating a strategic dependency and funding the normalization of surveillance technology.

Evidence & Analysis:

The “Unit 8200” Cybersecurity Doctrine

The audit reveals that JLP’s digital perimeter is secured by the “Tel Aviv Stack,” creating a deep dependency on Israeli defense-sector technology.

• Check Point Software: JLP utilizes Check Point for network security.⁵ Check Point, founded by Unit 8200 alumnus Gil Shwed, is the bedrock of the Israeli cyber-defense sector. Its technology, developed to secure the IDF, is dual-use. By licensing this, JLP funds the R&D that feeds back into Israeli state security.
• Wiz (Cloud Security): JLP’s aggressive migration to the cloud (Google GCP) is secured by Wiz, a firm founded by the team behind Adallom (Unit 8200 alumni).⁵ The reliance on Wiz for “Cloud Security Posture Management” means JLP’s visibility into its own digital infrastructure is mediated by Israeli-designed algorithms.
• SentinelOne: JLP employs SentinelOne for endpoint detection, creating a “Sensor Grid” across JLP’s devices that reports back to threat intelligence clouds engineered by former Israeli intelligence officers.⁵

Project Pegasus: Financing the Surveillance State

JLP is a founding funder of Project Pegasus, pledging part of an £840,000 fund to create a specialized police intelligence unit (OPAL) for retail crime.6

• The Biometric Link: This project integrates with the Auror platform. The audit identifies that Auror integrates with Oosto (formerly AnyVision) and Corsight AI—Israeli firms notorious for developing facial recognition tech used at West Bank checkpoints.⁵
• Systemic Implication: JLP is not just buying software; it is financing the infrastructure of biometric policing in the UK. By paying for police to use these tools, JLP is actively importing the “Occupation Model” of surveillance (predictive policing, facial matching, retrospective tracking) into British civil society. The capital provided by JLP helps validate and expand the market for these Israeli surveillance vendors, whose “field-tested” claims rely on their deployment against Palestinians.

Computer Vision & The Digitization of Physical Space

Waitrose is trialing Shopic (Smart Trolleys) and utilizing Trax (Shelf-edge cameras).5

• The Tech: Both are Israeli firms. Shopic uses computer vision to “see” products and customer behavior in real-time.
• Implication: This digitizes the physical store, turning the aisle into a data-extraction zone. The algorithms used to track a customer’s hand moving towards a shelf are derivatives of computer vision systems used for target acquisition and behavioral monitoring in security contexts. JLP’s adoption of this tech normalizes the “Panopticon” retail experience, where every movement is analyzed by AI trained in a militarized environment.

Strategic Alliances: Google Cloud & Project Nimbus

JLP’s £100m partnership with Google Cloud 4 constitutes a tertiary but significant link.

• The Nimbus Connection: Google is the provider of Project Nimbus, the cloud infrastructure for the Israeli military. JLP’s massive contract contributes to the profitability of the specific Google division (Cloud) that is servicing the IDF. While JLP’s data is legally separate, financially and structurally, JLP is a major tenant on the same infrastructure that powers the Israeli defense establishment’s AI capabilities.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: Cybersecurity software is a global commodity; using Check Point is industry standard, not ideological support.
• Assessment: “Industry Standard” is the mechanism of complicity. The Israeli cyber sector’s dominance is a direct result of the “military-to-civilian” pipeline. By choosing these vendors over non-Israeli alternatives (e.g., Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike), JLP makes a procurement choice that sustains the economic viability of Unit 8200’s alumni network. The “lock-in” effect makes this dependency structural; ripping out Check Point firewalls would be a massive operational risk, cementing the relationship.
• Analytical Conclusion: High Strategic Reliance. JLP cannot easily rip out its firewalls or cloud security. It is technologically tethered to Tel Aviv, subsidizing the Israeli defense sector’s R&D pipeline.

Domain 3: Political & Ideological Complicity (V-POL)

Goal: Expose the “Double Standard” in JLP’s geopolitical positioning and the institutional suppression of Palestinian solidarity within its “democratic” workforce.

Evidence & Analysis:

The “Safe Harbor” Violation: Ukraine vs. Gaza

The forensic comparison of JLP’s crisis response reveals a Systemic Bias that violates the neutrality principle.

• Ukraine (2022): JLP mobilized its full corporate weight. Chairman Sharon White condemned the “invasion,” donated £100k, matched customer donations, and employed refugees. The language used (“acts of aggression,” “humanity”) was morally absolute and politically engaged.⁸
• Gaza (2023–2024): In the face of plausible genocide (ICJ ruling context) and massive civilian casualties, JLP maintained corporate silence. There was no “Gaza Crisis Appeal” matched funding promoted on the homepage. Internal communications emphasized strict “neutrality.”
• Implication: This creates a hierarchy of humanity. Ukrainian life is worthy of corporate mobilization; Palestinian life is a “political complexity.” By failing to apply the “Safe Harbor” standard (protecting the vulnerable) to Palestinians, JLP aligns itself with the UK state’s geopolitical preferences rather than universal human rights.

The “Taste of Israel” Propaganda Operation

The audit highlights the distribution of the “Taste of Israel” brochure in Waitrose Kitchen magazine.17

• State Funding: The brochure was paid for by the Israeli Government Tourist Office.
• Content: It labeled the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem as part of Israel. It appropriated Palestinian cuisine (Za’atar, Tahini) as “Israeli.”
• Significance: This was not passive retail; it was active disinformation dissemination. Waitrose allowed its brand channel (the magazine) to be used as a vehicle for Israeli state propaganda that erases the Green Line. This is a direct act of political complicity, facilitating the state’s narrative of territorial maximalism and cultural erasure.

Internal Discipline: The Weaponization of Neutrality

The dismissal of Colleen Anthony (March 2024) serves as the “Smoking Gun” for internal suppression.8

• The Incident: Ms. Anthony, a Partner of 19 years, was fired for wearing a Palestine pin.
• The Double Standard: The Partnership explicitly supports “Pride” (LGBTQ+) and “Unity” (Black/Ethnic minority) networks, allowing symbols associated with these causes. By defining Palestinian identity as “political” (banned) and other identities as “human rights” (allowed), JLP management engages in Discriminatory Policing of speech.
• The Tribunal: Ms. Anthony has brought an employment tribunal claim for belief discrimination, arguing that anti-Zionism is a protected philosophical belief. The Partnership’s defense rests on “neutrality,” but the selective application of this policy renders it discriminatory under the Equality Act 2010.
• The “Partner” Myth: This incident shatters the illusion of “Industrial Democracy.” A true partnership would allow its owners to debate ethical standards. Instead, the Executive imposed a top-down censorship regime that mirrors the “chilling effect” sought by pro-Israel lawfare groups.

Lobbying & The “Establishment Nexus”

The involvement of Lord Mark Price (former Deputy Chair) establishes the “Revolving Door” between JLP and the State.

• Trajectory: Price moved from Waitrose to the Department for International Trade, where he founded the UK-Israel Trade Policy Working Group.
• Analysis: This confirms that the “Waitrose Worldview” is fully integrated with the British State’s Zionist trade policy. Price didn’t just sell dates; he built the diplomatic framework to protect that trade from BDS pressure, using his retail experience to advise on circumventing supply chain disruptions.⁸

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: The “Taste of Israel” incident was in 2015; it is historical.
• Assessment: The patterns persist. The refusal to condemn the Gaza bombardment in 2023/24 and the firing of Colleen Anthony in 2024 demonstrate that the ideological bias remains active and acute. The structural trade with settlements (dates/wine) continues unabated.
• Analytical Conclusion: Critical. The bias is institutional. The Partnership actively polices its workforce to suppress anti-occupation sentiment while providing a commercial platform for occupation goods.

Domain 4: Military & Intelligence Sustainment (V-MIL)

Goal: Assess the indirect support for the Israeli military apparatus through logistics, pension investments, and dual-use technology.

Evidence & Analysis:

Pension Fund Capital Allocation

The John Lewis Partnership Trust for Pensions (approx. £7.2bn assets) is a significant vector of passive financial complicity.3

• Mechanism: The Trust invests via Legal & General (L&G) in global index funds (e.g., MSCI World).
• Holdings: These funds automatically hold shares in Lockheed Martin, Raytheon (RTX), Caterpillar, and Elbit Systems.
• Significance: Every John Lewis “Partner” is, via their deferred wages (pension), a passive investor in the companies manufacturing the F-35s and bombs used in Gaza. Unlike the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund or KLP, the JLP Trust has failed to enact Negative Screening to exclude occupation-linked entities. The “Partnership” ethos is not applied to its capital; the money is managed with amoral “fiduciary” blindness.

Defense Logistics Overlap

JLP outsources logistics to GXO and XPO Logistics.14

• The Link: These are massive defense contractors in their own right. While JLP’s contracts are for groceries, relying on these integrators supports the logistics giants that service military supply chains globally.
• Assessment: This is Incidental Association (Low Impact) but highlights the difficulty of untangling the supply chain from the military-industrial complex.

Sustainment via “Dual-Use” Tech

As detailed in the Digital Domain, the purchase of Check Point and NICE Systems technology provides revenue to firms that are integral to the IDF’s capabilities.

• Sustainment: JLP is a “sustainment node.” By paying license fees to Check Point, JLP contributes to the financial health of the Israeli cyber-defense base. This is not direct military aid, but it is Economic Enablement of the military-industrial complex, ensuring the profitability of the sector that creates the IDF’s tools.

Counter-Arguments & Assessment:

• Counter-Argument: JLP does not buy weapons.
• Assessment: True. But in modern warfare, Logistics and Capital are weapons. By failing to divest its pension fund from arms manufacturers, JLP is financially complicit. By using Unit 8200 software, it is technologically complicit.
• Analytical Conclusion: Low to Moderate. The complicity here is derivative, not direct, but structurally reinforced by the Pension Fund’s passive investment strategy.

5. BDS-1000 Classification

Results Summary:

Final Score: 472 / 1000

Tier: Tier C (High Complicity)

Justification Summary:

The John Lewis Partnership falls into Tier C (High Complicity) due to its Political and Economic scores. While it lacks direct military contracts (keeping the Military score low), the Political Domain (V-POL) is critical due to the “Safe Harbor” double standard and the historical distribution of state propaganda (“Taste of Israel”). The Economic Domain (V-ECON) is driven by the structural reliance on settlement aggregators (Hadiklaim/Mehadrin) and the “Primafruit Buffer” which institutionalizes the trade. The Digital Domain (V-DIG) reflects a high strategic reliance on the Israeli cyber-stack, creating a lock-in effect. The score of 472 reflects a corporate entity that is not a primary driver of the occupation (like Elbit) but is a Vital Stabilizer, normalizing and funding the occupation through trade and silence.

Domain Scoring Summary

BDS-1000 Scoring Matrix – John Lewis Partnership

Domain	I	M	P	V-Domain Score
Military (V-MIL)	1.0	1.0	1.0	0.02
Economic (V-ECON)	3.8	7.0	7.0	3.80
Political (V-POL)	6.5	6.5	9.0	6.03
Digital (V-DIG)	3.8	8.0	8.0	3.80

V-Domain Calculations

• V-MIL:
  $$1.0 \times \min(1.0/7, 1) \times \min(1.0/7, 1) = 0.02$$
  * V-ECON:
  $$3.8 \times \min(7.0/7, 1) \times \min(7.0/7, 1) = 3.80$$
  • Note: Impact 3.8 (Sustained Trade), Magnitude 7 (Exclusive Partnership/Volume), Proximity 7 (Direct Partner via Primafruit).
• V-POL:
  $$6.5 \times \min(6.5/7, 1) \times \min(9.0/7, 1) = 6.03$$
  • Note: Impact 6.5 (Official Partnership/Propaganda), Magnitude 6.5 (National Reach), Proximity 9 (Direct Operator/Decision).
• V-DIG:
  $$3.8 \times \min(8.0/7, 1) \times \min(8.0/7, 1) = 3.80$$
  • Note: Impact 3.8 (Dual-Use Procurement), Magnitude 8 (Systemic Lock-in), Proximity 8 (Direct Licenses).

Final Composite Calculation

• Maximum Domain Score ($V_{MAX}$): 6.03 (Political)
• Sum of Others ($Sum_{OTHERS}$):
  $$0.02 + 3.80 + 3.80 = 7.62$$
  * Formula:
  $$BDS_{Score} = \frac{6.03 + (7.62 \times 0.2)}{16} \times 1000$$
  * Calculation:
  $$BDS_{Score} = \frac{6.03 + 1.524}{16} \times 1000 = \frac{7.554}{16} \times 1000 = 472.125$$

Final Score: 472

Tier: Tier C (High Complicity)

6. Recommended Action(s)

1. Targeted Boycott of Settlement Goods:

Activists should focus on the specific, verifiable settlement products: Medjool Dates (branded Waitrose No.1, MyJool, or Jordan River) and Golan Heights Wines (Yarden, Gamla, Mount Hermon). These are the “weakest links” in JLP’s ethical defense. Campaigns should highlight the “No.1” branding as a symbol of JLP’s “No.1 Priority” being profit over human rights. The “MyJool” rebranding must be exposed as a deceptive practice.

2. “Partner” Agitation & Unionization:

Leverage the internal dissonance. The dismissal of Colleen Anthony has created a grievance. Activists should support internal “Partner” networks to demand a Partnership Council Vote on ethical sourcing standards. The demand should be: “If we are owners, let us vote on funding apartheid.” This challenges the “Industrial Democracy” myth directly, forcing the leadership to either democratize foreign policy or admit the Partnership is a sham.

3. Pension Fund Divestment Campaign:

Partners should demand that the John Lewis Partnership Trust for Pensions adopt the UN Human Rights Council Business Enterprises exclusion list. A campaign titled “Don’t Invest My Wages in War Crimes” could mobilize the workforce to pressure the Trustees to instruct L&G to screen out occupation-linked firms like Motorola Solutions and Israeli banks.

4. Public Exposure of the “Primafruit Buffer”:

Investigative journalism and social media campaigns should expose the Primafruit arrangement. Show consumers that “Sourced by Primafruit” effectively means “Sourced from Mehadrin” and settlement aggregators. Breaking this buffer destroys the “ethical laundering” mechanism JLP relies on.

5. “Safe Harbor” Accountability:

Press the leadership (Jason Tarry) on the discrepancy between the Ukraine and Gaza responses. Demand a “Gaza Crisis Appeal” matched-funding campaign equivalent to the Ukraine effort. The refusal to do so serves as continued proof of political bias and should be used to challenge JLP’s “Ethical” branding in the public sphere.

Works cited

1. Meet Our Leadership Team, Board, and Committee – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/our-company/team
2. John Lewis Partnership makes Executive Team appointment, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/media-centre/latest-news/2025/23652
3. John Lewis economic Audit
4. U.K.’s Waitrose Taps Primafruit For Sourcing Imported Fruit | Food Logistics, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.foodlogistics.com/transportation/cold-chain/news/12042198/uks-waitrose-taps-primafruit-for-sourcing-imported-fruit
5. John Lewis digital Audit
6. Retail violence — Government launches Project Pegasus – Weightmans, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.weightmans.com/media-centre/news/retail-violence-government-launches-project-pegasus/
7. Project Pegasus to improve information sharing between police and retailers, accessed December 4, 2025, https://nbcc.police.uk/news/project-pegasus-to-improve-information-sharing-between-police-and-retailers
8. John Lewis political Audit
9. AT JLP REPORT 2025 – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/~/media/Files/J/john-lewis/corp/documents/belonging-at-jlp-report-2025.pdf
10. Support Colleen’s claim against John Lewis plc – CrowdJustice, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/support-colleens-claim/
11. Learn About Our Brands and Business Strategy – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/our-company
12. How does employee ownership work? – John Lewis Partnership Careers – JLP Jobs, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.jlpjobs.com/blog/how-does-employee-ownership-work/
13. A personal stake: Why employee-owned businesses return more than a profit, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.ilo.org/publications/personal-stake-why-employee-owned-businesses-return-more-profit
14. John Lewis military Audit
15. Compete for £12500 investment with John Lewis – Imperial College London, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/145886/compete-12500-investment-with-john-lewis/
16. John Lewis Launches ‘JLAB’ – Paul Coby’s Blog, accessed December 4, 2025, https://paulcoby.wordpress.com/2014/03/02/john-lewis-launches-jlab/
17. PSC calls for Waitrose meeting over ‘Taste of Israel’ brochure, accessed December 4, 2025, https://palestinecampaign.org/psc-calls-for-waitrose-meeting-over-taste-of-israel-brochure/
18. A British Supermarket Is Being Accused of Promoting Israeli Food Propaganda – VICE, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.vice.com/en/article/a-british-supermarket-is-being-accused-of-promoting-israeli-food-propaganda/
19. Waitrose Creates Exclusive Fruit Sourcing Partnership With Primafruit – Perishable News, accessed December 4, 2025, https://perishablenews.com/produce/waitrose-creates-exclusive-fruit-sourcing-partnership-with-primafruit/
20. John Lewis launches second JLAB innovation scheme, with £100K up for grabs for winning start-up – Computing UK, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.computing.co.uk/news/2401488/john-lewis-launches-second-jlab-innovation-scheme-with-gbp100k-up-for-grabs-for-winning-start-up
21. Main Target Dossier
22. John Lewis Calc
23. Partnership Model – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/our-company/partnership-model
24. EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP HOW TO GET STARTED – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/~/media/Files/J/john-lewis/corp/documents/EOA_The_How_to_get_started_guide.pdf
25. Financial results, reports and presentations – John Lewis Partnership, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/financial-performance/results-and-presentations
26. Changes to the John Lewis Partnership Executive Team, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.johnlewispartnership.co.uk/media-centre/latest-news/2025/23577
27. Get Involved – Divestment – BDS Movement, accessed December 4, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/Get-involved-divestment
28. From economy of occupation to economy of genocide – (A/HRC/59/23) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 – Question of Palestine – the United Nations, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.un.org/unispal/document/a-hrc-59-23-from-economy-of-occupation-to-economy-of-genocide-report-special-rapporteur-francesca-albanese-palestine-2025/
29. BDS Corporate Complicity Criteria, accessed December 4, 2025, https://bdsmovement.net/news/bds-corporate-complicity-criteria
30. A/HRC/59/23 Advance edited version – ohchr, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session59/advance-version/a-hrc-59-23-aev.pdf
31. A Rhetorical Frame Analysis of Palestinian-Led Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) Movement Discourse – ODU Digital Commons, accessed December 4, 2025, https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1102&context=english_etds
32. A taste of apartheid, courtesy of Waitrose – Palestine Solidarity Campaign, accessed December 4, 2025, https://palestinecampaign.org/taste-apartheid-courtesy-waitrose/
33. Waitrose Magazine defends Taste of Israel pamphlet against complaints it ignores the ‘illegal occupation of Palestine’ | The Independent, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/waitrose-magazine-defends-taste-of-israel-pamphlet-against-complaints-it-ignores-the-illegal-occupation-of-palestine-10113539.html
34. UK supermarket Waitrose suffers brand damage for promoting Israel | The Electronic Intifada, accessed December 4, 2025, https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/amena-saleem/uk-supermarket-waitrose-suffers-brand-damage-promoting-israel
35. OAE Disciplinary Summaries – NJ Courts, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.njcourts.gov/sites/default/files/attorneys/disciplinary-review-board/disciplinarysum2022.pdf
36. Action plan to tackle shoplifting launched – GOV.UK, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/action-plan-to-tackle-shoplifting-launched
37. Major UK retailers urged to quit ‘authoritarian’ police facial recognition strategy, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/oct/28/major-uk-retailers-urged-to-quit-authoritarian-police-facial-recognition-strategy
38. John Lewis invests in the future of retail with launch of JLab incubator – The Drum, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.thedrum.com/news/john-lewis-invests-future-retail-launch-jlab-incubator
39. Primafruit Sustainability Report 22:24_28.11.24.indd – Fresca Group, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.frescagroup.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Primafruit-Sustainability-Report-22-24_28.11.24_LR.pdf