The article detailing Israel's receipt and use of US-supplied D-9 bulldozers for demolishing Palestinian homes in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem is deeply troubling. It compels me to question the investment decisions of major financial institutions, specifically HSBC, regarding the manufacturer of these machines: Caterpillar Inc.
It is well-documented that Caterpillar's D-9 bulldozers are a primary tool used in the demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure. These actions cause immense suffering, displace families, and violate international law. Caterpillar has faced years of criticism and even lawsuits for supplying equipment used in these demolitions, despite being aware of its devastating impact on Palestinian civilians.
HSBC, through its asset management arms (like HSBC Global Asset Management), holds significant investments in Caterpillar. As a shareholder, HSBC is directly linked to the profits generated by the sale of equipment used in these controversial and destructive actions. This raises profound ethical questions:
**Complicity**: Does HSBC believe its investment is compatible with its stated commitments to human rights and responsible investment principles? Funding a company whose products are central to a documented pattern of home demolitions and displacement seems fundamentally at odds.
**Due Diligence**: Has HSBC conducted adequate human rights due diligence regarding its investment in Caterpillar, specifically concerning the use of its equipment in the Occupied Palestinian Territories? How does this align with their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria?
**Accountability**: What steps is HSBC taking to engage with Caterpillar management to demand they cease supplying equipment for uses that violate international law and human rights? Or is profit the sole consideration?
While Caterpillar equipment has legitimate uses, the documented, repeated, and devastating deployment of D-9s in demolishing Palestinian homes cannot be ignored or excused. HSBC's continued financial backing of Caterpillar, without clear and effective action to mitigate this harm, makes the bank complicit in these actions by association.
I urge HSBC to publicly address this specific issue, review its investment in Caterpillar in light of these grave human rights concerns, and use its shareholder influence to demand Caterpillar implement concrete measures to prevent its equipment from being used in unlawful demolitions. Failing to do so undermines HSBC's credibility on sustainability and human rights.
The article detailing Israel's receipt and use of US-supplied D-9 bulldozers for demolishing Palestinian homes in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem is deeply troubling. It compels me to question the investment decisions of major financial institutions, specifically HSBC, regarding the manufacturer of these machines: Caterpillar Inc.
It is well-documented that Caterpillar's D-9 bulldozers are a primary tool used in the demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure. These actions cause immense suffering, displace families, and violate international law. Caterpillar has faced years of criticism and even lawsuits for supplying equipment used in these demolitions, despite being aware of its devastating impact on Palestinian civilians.
HSBC, through its asset management arms (like HSBC Global Asset Management), holds significant investments in Caterpillar. As a shareholder, HSBC is directly linked to the profits generated by the sale of equipment used in these controversial and destructive actions. This raises profound ethical questions:
**Complicity**: Does HSBC believe its investment is compatible with its stated commitments to human rights and responsible investment principles? Funding a company whose products are central to a documented pattern of home demolitions and displacement seems fundamentally at odds.
**Due Diligence**: Has HSBC conducted adequate human rights due diligence regarding its investment in Caterpillar, specifically concerning the use of its equipment in the Occupied Palestinian Territories? How does this align with their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria?
**Accountability**: What steps is HSBC taking to engage with Caterpillar management to demand they cease supplying equipment for uses that violate international law and human rights? Or is profit the sole consideration?
While Caterpillar equipment has legitimate uses, the documented, repeated, and devastating deployment of D-9s in demolishing Palestinian homes cannot be ignored or excused. HSBC's continued financial backing of Caterpillar, without clear and effective action to mitigate this harm, makes the bank complicit in these actions by association.
I urge HSBC to publicly address this specific issue, review its investment in Caterpillar in light of these grave human rights concerns, and use its shareholder influence to demand Caterpillar implement concrete measures to prevent its equipment from being used in unlawful demolitions. Failing to do so undermines HSBC's credibility on sustainability and human rights.