The chilling practice of employing private entities and non-state actors to facilitate atrocities, thereby creating a degree of deniability or separating official state hands from the bloodiest deeds, is far from new. From the early 20th century's fascistic regimes to contemporary conflicts, the pattern of states leveraging external groups and corporate interests to execute brutal agendas remains a disturbing constant. This strategy allows for plausible deniability, complicates accountability and often leverages pre-existing structures of power or greed.
The Grandparents of Boston Consulting Group and Donald Trump’s American Fascist Party ~ Mussolini's Fascists and Hitler's Nazis
Mussolini's Italian Fascist Party and Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime extensively utilised methods which outsourced violence and consolidated power through private, quasi-state or corporate entities. These examples serve as grim reminders of how easily states co-opt external actors to carry out their darkest designs, insulating themselves from direct responsibility while achieving their genocidal or repressive aims.
Mussolini's Italian Fascist Party:
Blackshirts (MVSN): While eventually integrated into the state apparatus, the Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale (MVSN), or Blackshirts, began as a paramilitary force loyal to Mussolini and the Fascist Party. They were instrumental in the initial violent suppression of political opponents intimidation and the consolidation of fascist power before Mussolini fully established dictatorial rule. Their violence was often outsourced from direct state orders allowing the nascent fascist government to claim a degree of distance while benefiting from the terror they sowed. This early reliance on an ostensibly non-state armed wing illustrates a calculated move to unleash brutality without immediate, direct governmental fingerprints.
Colonial Atrocities and Auxiliary Forces: During the Second Italo-Ethiopian War (1935-1936) and in occupied territories like Yugoslavia and Albania, Italian forces committed widespread war crimes, including the use of chemical weapons, concentration camps and summary executions. To suppress resistance, Italian commanders, such as General Mario Roatta in Yugoslavia, actively sought and integrated local collaborators, such as the Chetniks, to conduct brutal clean-up operations against partisans and civilian populations. This effectively outsourced the dirty work of counter-insurgency and ethnic vengeance, shielding Italian regular forces from some of the direct accusations while achieving their objectives. Reports detail atrocities like throwing prisoners from planes, running them over with tanks and disembowelling women, often carried out by forces encouraged or enabled by Italian command. The strategic deployment of such auxiliary forces amplified Italian power while providing layers of deniability.
Economic Exploitation and Corporate Involvement: While less about direct mercenaries for mass killing, Mussolini's corporatist state blurred the lines between private industry and state goals. Industrialists who aligned with the regime profited immensely from colonial ventures and the war economy, often at the expense of local populations and through coercive labour practices. This fusion of private profit with state aggression established a precedent for corporate complicity in state-sponsored violence. Consider for a moment the comparison between Trump’s desire to remove Palestinaians from Gaza and BCG’s direct involvement in the deaths of hundreds at GHF sites and their recently uncovered Project Aurora - more on that below.
Hitler's Nazi Group:
SS and its Corporate Empire: The Schutzstaffel (SS) under Heinrich Himmler evolved into a vast, self-sufficient empire that transcended a mere state security force. It established its own industrial enterprises, including the Deutsche Erd- und Steinwerke GmbH (DEST), which directly utilised concentration camp slave labour for resource extraction and production. This was a direct form of "outsourcing" the labour of persecution to an internal, yet distinct, corporate arm of the Nazi machine, blurring the lines between state and enterprise. The SS's integrated economic and coercive power epitomises the blurring of lines between military, political and corporate entities in the execution of atrocity.
Private Companies and the Holocaust: The extent of private sector complicity in Nazi atrocities is staggering. German companies were deeply entwined in the machinery of genocide, illustrating that the Holocaust was not solely a state enterprise but a horrific collaboration with opportunistic businesses.
IG Farben: This chemical giant produced Zyklon B, the gas used in the extermination camps, and operated a large factory at Monowitz (Auschwitz III), extensively using slave labour from the concentration camp, leading to the deaths of tens of thousands. Their active role in providing the instruments of death and exploiting slave labour represents direct material support for genocide.
Topf and Sons: This engineering firm designed and built the crematoria and ventilation systems for the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, optimising the efficiency of mass murder. Their technical expertise was weaponised for mass murder, demonstrating that professional skill, when unburdened by ethics, can become an accelerant for atrocity.
Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Bank: These banks actively participated in the Aryanisation of Jewish property, confiscating assets and even laundering "victim gold" from concentration camps. Their financial services underpinned the economic theft inherent in the genocidal project.
Deutsche Reichsbahn: The German national railway profited directly from the transportation of millions of Jews and other victims to extermination camps across Europe. The logistical infrastructure of genocide was provided by a state-owned but corporately run entity, profiting from the extermination process.
Many other major German companies, including Krupp, Flick, AEG, Allianz and Continental, extensively used forced labour from concentration camps and occupied territories, often under brutal conditions. This was not merely compliance; it was active participation and profit-seeking from the genocidal project. These companies eagerly capitalised on the availability of slave labour, cementing their complicity.
Einsatzgruppen and Local Collaborators: While the Einsatzgruppen were SS-led death squads, their operations in Eastern Europe frequently involved the recruitment and direct assistance of local auxiliary police units and militias. These collaborators, often fuelled by antisemitism or personal gain, played a crucial role in the mass shootings and roundups, essentially "outsourcing" the direct killing to local hands under Nazi command. This decentralised violence allowed the Nazis to project power and terror far more widely and efficiently.
Contemporary Manifestations ~ Gaza and the Corporate Nexus
The present situation in Gaza echoes these historical patterns, with new forms of outsourcing and corporate complicity emerging. The evolution of this outsourcing, from crude paramilitary forces to sophisticated corporate consulting, signifies a chilling refinement of the methods used to orchestrate mass suffering.
Israeli Army (IDF) and Local Militias/Clans: Reports show that the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) are actively engaging and even arming local Palestinian clans and militias within Gaza in an attempt to counter Hamas and create alternative governance structures. This strategy mirrors historical precedents of using local proxies to exert control and suppress opposition, often with devastating consequences for the civilian population.
Yasser Abu Shabab and the "Popular Forces": Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself confirmed that Israel has "activated clans in Gaza that oppose Hamas", stating it "saves the lives of IDF soldiers" (Saleh, 2025). One prominent example is the group led by Yasser Abu Shabab, often referred to as the "Popular Forces" or even a "criminal gang" (AP News, 2025). This group, described as a militia of hundreds, operates in eastern Rafah and near the Kerem Shalom crossing, controlling territory and aid routes (Saleh, 2025).
Direct Arming and Support: Israeli defence sources have confirmed that Israel is providing these groups with weapons, including Kalashnikov rifles, some reportedly seized from Hamas (CBC News, 2025). Abu Shabab's group has admitted to coordinating with Israeli authorities, stating they keep the IDF informed of their operations and have received "logistical and financial support from several parties" (AP News, 2025). This direct arming of local, criminal, elements is a stark form of outsourcing coercive power.
Role in Aid Distribution and War Crimes: These groups, including Abu Shabab's, have claimed to protect humanitarian aid but have also been accused by UN officials and Palestinian resistance factions of looting aid (Mondoweiss, 2025). Furthermore, there are credible reports that these Israeli-backed groups, alongside the IDF, have been involved in shooting and killing Palestinians seeking aid at distribution centres (Euro-Med Monitor, 2025). For instance, reports detail an incident where Popular Forces gunmen, together with the IDF, opened fire at a crowd seeking aid at a Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) site, killing multiple people (Mondoweiss, 2025). Hamas and other Palestinian factions have branded these collaborators as "traitors for hire" and vowed to confront them, leading to internal armed confrontations (Saleh, 2025). The weaponisation of aid and the use of proxies to control its distribution constitutes a direct contribution to conditions of life calculated to bring about destruction.
Strategic Objectives: This strategy is a calculated move by Israel to weaken Hamas's control, instigate infighting among Palestinian factions and establish a local governing alternative. However, critics, including former Israeli officials, have warned that arming such groups, many with links to criminal activities or even ISIS, is "complete madness" and dangerous, as there is no guarantee these weapons will not be turned against Israel or further destabilise the Strip (CBC News, 2025).
Additional Fatah-aligned Militias: Beyond Abu Shabab's group, reports suggest Israel is also arming and coordinating with other Fatah-aligned militias in areas like Gaza City and Khan Younis, further indicating a systematic approach to cultivating proxy forces (Mondoweiss, 2025).
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) and its Collusion ~ The GHF presents a deeply concerning modern example of how humanitarian aid can be weaponised and outsourced for evil purposes, leading to complicity in genocide.
Coordination with Israeli Forces: Reports from organisations like Euro-Med Monitor and the Center for Constitutional Rights allege that the GHF's operational model involves close coordination with the Israeli army (Euro-Med Monitor, 2025). This coordination is described as luring civilians to specific distribution points where they are then subjected to attacks, killings and injuries (Euro-Med Monitor, 2025). This collaboration turns a supposed aid mission into a dangerous trap.
Death Traps and Starvation as a Weapon: The GHF's distribution points arecharacterised death traps, effectively serving as tools in the systematic starvation and targeting of Palestinian civilians (Euro-Med Monitor, 2025). This aligns with the definition of genocide through the deliberate infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction. By channelling aid through such dangerous, militarised avenues, the GHF, whether intentionally or through reckless disregard, contributes to the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe.
Private Security Contractors and US Involvement: Critically, the GHF's operations involve US private military contractors guarding these militarised sites, alongside Israeli forces (Al-Shabaka, 2025; Wikipedia, 2025). This directly points to the outsourcing of security and, by extension, the enforcement of a system that is contributing to civilian deaths and forced displacement. The fact that the US State Department has provided significant funding for GHF further underscores potential US complicity (Wikipedia, 2025). The presence of private US contractors at these death traps implicates US corporate and governmental actors in the dire consequences.
Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and Project Aurora ~ The Apex of Corporate Greed and Genocide Logistics:
Project Aurora's Premise: The involvement of Boston Consulting Group (BCG) in "Project Aurora" represents a stark modern example of how sophisticated corporate consulting can be leveraged in the mechanics of large-scale human rights abuses, directly contributing to genocide. Project Aurora, as reported by the Financial Times, involved developing a financial model for the displacement of over half a million Palestinians from Gaza through "displacement packages" funded by foreign entities (Anadolu Agency, 2025). This is not merely aid; it is a monetised plan for population transfer, a war crime and a component of genocide when enforced. It signifies a cold, detached approach to human suffering, where forced relocation is reduced to a logistical and financial exercise.
Logistics and Mechanics of Displacement: BCG's role, despite their subsequent claims of "unauthorised work" by rogue partners, highlights how US corporate expertise can be applied to the logistical challenges of implementing a genocidal or ethnic cleansing agenda (Consultancy-me.com, 2025). Developing financial models for "displacement packages" shows a cold, calculated approach to forced population removal, framing human suffering in terms of cost-benefit analysis. This is beyond mere advisory services; it is the provision of a blueprint for what is a crime against humanity.
US Corporate Greed Taking a Lead: The emphasis here is crucial: a prominent US consulting firm, driven by profit and engagement, was involved in structuring a plan that fundamentally undermines the right of return and facilitates forced displacement. This demonstrates how US corporate interests have become deeply embedded in the "logistics and mechanics" of actions that amount to international crimes, moving beyond mere "aid" to active participation in a deeply problematic framework. The allure of lucrative contracts, even those tied to ethically reprehensible outcomes, exposes a profound moral bankruptcy.
BCG's Cowardly and Disingenuous Defence: BCG's defence – that the work on Project Aurora was "unauthorised" or conducted by "rogue partners" – is nothing short of a cowardly and disingenuous attempt to evade culpability (Consultancy-me.com, 2025). This narrative is a not-so-subtle twist on the infamous "only following orders" defence. It seeks to atomise responsibility, suggesting that the institutional machinery of a global consulting giant can somehow remain untainted by the actions of its senior personnel operating under its corporate banner and leveraging its reputation. Such a defence defies credulity. Firms like BCG thrive on meticulous oversight, project management and stringent ethical guidelines. The idea that a project of this scale and sensitivity, involving the potential forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, could proceed without the explicit or implicit sanction, or at the very least knowledge, of the firm's leadership is frankly absurd. This is precisely the kind of systemic complicity that demands robust accountability, rather than allowing corporations to hide behind bureaucratic obfuscation. The "rogue partner" narrative is a desperate attempt to whitewash corporate complicity, a blatant manoeuvre to protect the brand while distancing from the moral stain.
Corporate Accountability to the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The question of holding corporate entities like BCG accountable up to and including prosecution by the International Criminal Court is critical, albeit complex. While the Rome Statute of the ICC currently prosecutes individuals rather than "legal persons" or corporations, the actions of corporate executives and those in positions of authority within such firms can and should be subject to its jurisdiction.
Individual Criminal Responsibility: Under Article 25 of the Rome Statute, individuals can be held criminally responsible for crimes within the ICC's jurisdiction if they "commit" such crimes, "order, solicit or induce" their commission, or "in any other way contribute to the commission" of crimes by a group (ICC, no date). This framework directly implicates senior corporate personnel. If BCG partners or executives knowingly developed a plan that facilitates or directly contributes to war crimes or genocide, they could be held individually liable for aiding and abetting, or even as co-perpetrators. The financial modelling for "displacement packages" in Project Aurora, if proven to be an integral component of a forced population transfer or genocidal act, places those involved squarely within the potential purview of the ICC. Their specialised expertise and services, far from being neutral, become instrumental tools in the commission of atrocities, effectively rendering them accomplices.
The "Knowledge" Threshold: For complicity, the prosecution would need to demonstrate that those involved had knowledge of the illicit purpose of their work and that their actions substantially contributed to the crime (Harvard International Law Journal, 2016). Given the widely documented situation in Gaza and the very nature of "displacement packages" for a besieged population, it would be exceptionally difficult for BCG executives to credibly claim ignorance of the potential for their work to facilitate war crimes or crimes against humanity. Their role was not merely advisory; it was allegedly to provide the mechanics and logistics for a deeply problematic policy, making their claimed lack of knowledge untenable.
A Precedent for Future Prosecutions: While prosecuting a corporation as an entity remains a legal hurdle, successful prosecutions of corporate officials at the ICC would set a powerful precedent. It would send an unequivocal message that no individual, regardless of their position in the corporate hierarchy, is immune from accountability for complicity in the most heinous crimes. Such cases would force a re-evaluation of corporate due diligence and ethical responsibility in conflict zones and beyond, making human rights compliance not just a matter of "cost of doing business" but a fundamental legal obligation with severe personal consequences. The threat of individual criminal charges could significantly alter corporate risk assessments and deter future involvement in morally bankrupt ventures.
The Ultimate Responsibility of Trump
The discussion of US corporate involvement inevitably brings into sharp focus the ultimate responsibility of Donald Trump. While the US is not a state party to the Rome Statute, and American presidents often cite this as a shield for US nationals, the moral and political accountability of Trump for the actions of US firms on the global stage, particularly when those actions border on or contribute to international crimes, is profound.
Executive Influence and Oversight: Trump, as the head of the executive branch, possesses significant power to regulate the conduct of US corporations operating abroad. This includes the ability to issue executive orders, implement sanctions and direct federal agencies to investigate and prosecute firms involved in human rights abuses or international crimes (The White House, 2025). Failure to robustly investigate and act against US firms implicated in such serious allegations, especially those that directly support or facilitate actions by a state receiving substantial US aid, amounts to a tacit endorsement of their conduct. Trump’s inaction becomes a de facto green light for corporate malfeasance.
Moral and Diplomatic Authority: Beyond legalistic interpretations, Trump’s moral and diplomatic authority carries immense weight (US Department of State, no date). When US corporations are credibly accused of complicity in actions that violate international law, the President's silence or insufficient action contributes to an environment of impunity. It signals to the world that US corporate interests may override universal human rights principles, eroding America's standing as a proponent of justice and the rule of law. A President’s duty extends beyond national borders when national actors are implicated in global atrocities.
"Following Orders" in a Corporate Context: Just as the "only following orders" defence is rejected for individuals, the argument that a government or its leader cannot be held responsible for the actions of its national corporations abroad is equally flimsy. The US President directs US foreign policy, which often creates the conditions and opportunities for these firms to operate. When these operations directly align with, or provide the machinery for, policies deemed unlawful by international bodies, the President bears a heavy burden of responsibility. They have a duty to ensure that US commercial interests do not become engines of atrocity, and that US firms uphold international legal norms. The complicity of US corporations, unchecked by their own government, becomes an extension of state policy, making the highest office accountable for the ethical conduct of its national economic actors. The President, as the ultimate custodian of American values and legal standing on the world stage, cannot absolve themselves of this profound responsibility.
A Disturbing Continuity
The historical parallels are undeniable. From Mussolini's use of Blackshirts and local collaborators to Hitler's corporate partners like IG Farben and Topf and Sons, the pattern of states and ideological groups leveraging private entities to execute their brutal agendas is a recurring feature of modern warfare and genocide. The current situation in Gaza, with the confirmed use of local armed groups by the IDF, the role of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, and the Boston Consulting Group's "Project Aurora", demonstrates that this disturbing trend continues. The willingness of US corporate entities to engage in the logistics and mechanics of population displacement and the weaponisation of aid, even if couched in humanitarian language, underscores a chilling evolution where corporate greed and strategic ambition converge with the systematic infliction of suffering. BCG's disingenuous denial is not merely an act of self-preservation; it is an attempt to deflect accountability for grave actions. Ultimately, the individuals within such firms who designed and implemented these plans, along with the US leadership that implicitly or explicitly permits such corporate conduct, must be held to account, up to and including prosecution by the ICC where individual responsibility for international crimes can be established. This is not merely a legalistic point; it is a moral imperative to challenge the impunity that allows the outsourcing of war crimes to persist across generations, demanding that corporate boardrooms and presidential offices recognise their profound ethical and legal obligations.
References
Al-Shabaka. (2025) Outsourcing Occupation: US Private Contractors in Gaza. https://al-shabaka.org/policy-memos/outsourcing-occupation-us-private-contractors-in-gaza/
Anadolu Agency. (2025) Palestinians condemn plan modelled by US firm to forcibly displace Gazans.https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/palestinians-condemn-plan-modelled-by-us-firm-to-forcibly-displace-gazans/3623485
AP News. (2025) Israel backs an anti-Hamas armed group known for looting aid in Gaza. Here's what we know. https://apnews.com/article/gaza-armed-groups-hamas-israel-looting-b3033fd46a25a6382c8e13d3b4ae7f42
CBC News. (2025) Israel 'operated clans' in Gaza, Netanyahu says, after being accused of arming Palestinian militias. Available at: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/mideast-war-israel-hamas-ghf-sites-netanyahu-1.7554073
Consultancy-me.com. (2025) Boston Consulting Group's reckoning after Gaza aid project controversy. https://www.consultancy-me.com/news/11015/boston-consulting-groups-reckoning-after-gaza-aid-project-controversy
Euro-Med Monitor. (2025) Gaza Humanitarian Foundation: Direct accomplice in Israel's killing and starvation machine, must be held accountable. https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/gaza-humanitarian-foundation-direct-accomplice-israels-killing-and-starvation-machine-must-be-held-accountable
Harvard International Law Journal. (2016) Corporate Liability under the Rome Statute. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/ilj/2016/07/corporate-liability-under-the-rome-statute/
International Criminal Court (ICC). (no date) How the Court works. https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works
Mondoweiss. (2025) Inside the Hamas unit fighting Israeli-armed gangs that loot aid and facilitate displacement in Gaza. https://mondoweiss.net/2025/06/inside-the-hamas-unit-fighting-israeli-armed-gangs-that-loot-aid-and-facilitate-displacement-in-gaza/
Saleh, A. (2025) Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza brand local Abu Shabab gang "traitors for hire". https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/07/10/palestinian-resistance-factions-in-gaza-brand-local-abu-shabab-gang-as-trai tors-for-hire/
The White House. (2025) One Voice for America's Foreign Relations. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/one-voice-for-americas-foreign-relations/
US Department of State. (no date) Duties of the Secretary of State. https://www.state.gov/duties-of-the-secretary-of-state/
Wikipedia. (2025) Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Humanitarian_Foundation
Author Michael Jones
Share this post