NBIM divests firms linked to Gaza and West Bank crisis

Norway’s $2 trillion sovereign wealth fund, Norges Bank Investment Management, has divested US machinery manufacturer Caterpillar and five Israeli banks from its equity portfolio because of the risk of these firms contributing to human rights violations in the Palestinian territories.

The ethics committee for the world’s largest sovereign investor, which manages the assets of the oil fund, found that Caterpillar’s yellow bulldozers were being used in the “unlawful destruction of Palestinian property” and Caterpillar has “not implemented any measures to pre­vent such use.” NBIM had a $2.4 billion investment in the company at the end of 2024, equivalent to an ownership stake of around 1.2 per cent.

Meanwhile, NBIM has divested Israeli banks First International Bank of Israel Ltd and the holding company FIBI Holdings Ltd, Bank Leumi Le-Israel BM, Mizrahi Tefahot Bank Ltd, and Bank Hapoalim BM because these businesses have provided financial services required for construction activity in the West Bank, which had been “established in violation of international law”.

Last year, the United Nations found that Israeli settlements built on territory seized in 1967 were illegal, a ruling that Israel called “fundamentally wrong” because of its historical and biblical ties to the land.

“Before deciding to exclude a company, Norges Bank shall consider whether other measures, including active ownership, may be better suited. The board’s assessment is that it is not appropriate to use other measures in these cases,” said NBIM in a statement.

Part of an ongoing purge

The latest divestments mark a step up in the oil fund’s response to growing scrutiny of whether it has been helping to finance Israel’s war in Gaza, and come in response to Norway’s Ministry of Finance asking the fund to review its investments in Israeli companies.

Sponsored Content

A letter from the Ministry of Finance in early August questioned the fund’s individual investments given the deteriorating situation in the West Bank and Gaza.

Earlier in the month, NBIM sold its eleven holdings of Israeli companies outside of its equity benchmark index and severed ties with external Israeli fund managers. It means the fund’s investments in Israel are now limited to companies that are in its equity benchmark index.

However, it won’t invest in all Israeli companies in its reference index. There were 56 Israeli companies in the benchmark index – which consists of around 9,200 global companies – at the end of the first half of the year. NBIM currently invests in 38, with a total investment value of around NOK 19 billion (approximately $1.9 billion).

“These measures were taken in response to extraordinary circumstances. The situation in Gaza is a serious humanitarian crisis. We are invested in companies that operate in a country at war, and conditions in the West Bank and Gaza have recently worsened. In response, we will further strengthen our due diligence,” said Nicolai Tangen, chief executive of Norges Bank Investment Management, speaking in early August. “The measures we are taking will simplify the management of our investments in this market and reduce the number of companies that we and the Council on Ethics monitor.”

The oil fund’s divestment strategy has also lagged Norway’s much smaller NOK 878 billion ($87 billion) Kommunal Landspensjonskasse (KLP), the fund for local government employees and healthcare workers.

In July, KLP stepped up exclusion to include US industrials group Oshkosh Corporation and Germany’s ThyssenKrupp for selling weapons including armoured personnel carriers, warships and submarines to the Israeli military.

Updated expectations

NBIM said that in 2022 and 2024 it updated the expectation document on human rights and strengthened the expectations of companies’ conduct in conflict areas to reduce the risk that they contribute to violations of human rights and international law.

Since 2020, NBIM has contacted over 60 companies about due diligence and risk-reducing measures in war and conflict areas.

“We have had dialogue with over 30 companies with operations connected to the West Bank and Gaza. This is ongoing work that is given high priority,” said the fund.

The investor monitors new companies that enter the investment portfolio on a daily basis, and since 2024 has required that external managers must have prior approval to make investments in Israeli companies that were not already included in the portfolio.

“Not all new companies that were assessed received such approval,” it said.

That includes Bet Shemesh Engines Holdings, the Israeli aerospace and defence company, which was originally assessed as a company with medium risk. The Ethics Council said it should have escalated the risk sooner after media reports uncovered the investment, prompting public outcry.

“Given the information that has now emerged, the company would have been assessed as high risk. With a broadly invested global portfolio, there will always be a risk that information is not captured early enough, or that we make assessments we, in hindsight, would have made differently,” said the fund.

Leave a Comment

Why traditional investment committees can amplify group biases

Why traditional investment committees can amplify group biases

Investment committee meetings, a governance cornerstone at every asset owner organisation, run the risk of amplifying group biases and social dynamics, and can push the IC towards recommending more extreme investment positions collectively than the average of their individual views. Bernhard Scherer, head of portfolio implementation at ADIA, unpacks the thesis in a new paper.

Sort content by

Moving from risk 1.0 to risk 2.0

As investors move into 'risk 2.0', how should they change their modelling approach and investment toolkits? WTW global head of portfolio strategy Jeff Chee outlines in this column why investors should consider principles such as greater use of qualitative risk measures.

Private asset funds are no longer fit-for-purpose

The surging interest in generative AI has triggered a technological arms race, driving demand for data centres. Investors are looking to capitalise on what is often described as a generational opportunity, but as Blue Owl’s James Clarke cautions, there are several important factors to assess in partners for the long-term.

PRI slashes reporting burden to preserve code relevance among signatories

The Principles for Responsible Investment will reduce signatories’ responsibilities in their annual mandatory reporting from 240 questions to just 40 next year. The outgoing PRI chief David Atkin explains the move and why asset owners have a big role in stabilising the discussion around responsible investment. 

LGPS Central doubles in size; looks to add more alternatives

In a rare interview, Jayne Atkinson, chief investment officer of the £100 billion ($132 billion) UK pool LGPS Central, reveals the plan to scale up its offering after almost doubling its assets under management, including expanding alternatives to new allocations in hedge funds, diversified growth funds and insurance-linked securities.

NBIM dethrones GPIF to become the world’s largest asset owner

Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is now the world’s largest asset owner according to the Thinking Ahead Institute's annual Asset Owner 100 report, which also outlines the similarities and challenges among top capital allocators globally. 

Sweden’s AP2 and AP6 conflict over PE investments

The Swedish government’s plans to streamline the country’s pension system and merge the $8 billion buffer fund AP6 with its larger and more diversified sibling, the $48 billion AP2, have hit a bump in the road. Major points of contention include AP6's large private equity exposures and staff integration. 

Previous