The United Nations has added Israel to its annual blacklist of states and armed groups credibly accused of committing sexual violence in conflict zones. The decision, confirmed by sources inside the UN Secretariat, places the Israeli Defence Forces alongside the usual suspects from Syria, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Whitehall sources confirm that Britain’s Foreign Office is demanding immediate and full transparency from both the UN and Israel over the evidence that led to this listing.
This is not a routine bureaucratic update. This is a stain on a nation that has long wrapped itself in the language of moral exceptionalism. The blacklist was created in 2010 under Security Council Resolution 1888, and it has never before included a Western democracy. Until now. The UN’s Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, is understood to have personally signed off on the inclusion after reviewing multiple reports from NGOs and UN field monitors.
What reports? Sources close to the investigation say the evidence centres on incidents during the 2023 Gaza conflict and operations in the West Bank. Specific allegations include the use of sexual humiliation as a weapon during interrogations and the systematic exploitation of female detainees. The Israeli government has vehemently denied the claims, calling the listing a “blood libel” and accusing the UN of allowing itself to be hijacked by anti-Israel bias. But the UN’s process is opaque by design. The list is compiled from confidential field reports, survivor testimonies, and medical records. No country has the right to vet the evidence before inclusion.
Britain’s response is instructive. Foreign Office Minister David Lammy has issued a statement demanding to see the underlying documentation. “The United Kingdom unreservedly condemns all forms of sexual violence. We urge the UN to publish its full findings so that all parties can be held accountable,” he said. But don’t mistake this for a principled stance. This is damage control. The UK, as a permanent Security Council member, has a duty to enforce the very resolutions that created this blacklist. Yet it is now effectively questioning the list’s credibility because it includes an ally.
Israel has 90 days to respond to the listing. During this period, it can submit its own evidence and legal arguments to the UN. If the UN deems the response unsatisfying, Israel will remain on the list for the next year, with all the reputational and diplomatic consequences that entails. That includes potential restrictions on arms sales from countries that observe the UN’s guidelines. Britain, of course, has already suspended some arms exports to Israel over the Gaza war. But a UN blacklist puts that decision on a different plane of global governance.
What happens next is anyone’s guess. The UN will likely not release the full dossier unless forced to by a Security Council vote or a legal challenge. Israel is already assembling a legal team to fight the designation. Meanwhile, other countries on the list, such as the Taliban and the Sudanese Rapid Support Forces, will watch with amusement. They have been on this list for years with no real consequences. Western powers never cared until one of their own was caught in the crosshairs.
The real scandal here is not that Israel is on the list. It is that the UN blacklist exists at all. It is a half-measure, a piece of paper that shames but does not punish. Sexual violence in conflict is endemic across dozens of conflicts. Yet only a handful of actors are ever named. And when one of the good guys gets named, the system suddenly looks rigged. The question Britain must answer is this: Do you believe in the process, or do you believe in the power? Because right now, they are pointing in different directions.
