The United Nations has officially included Israel on its annual blacklist regarding conflict-related sexual violence for the first time. A report released by the office of Secretary-General António Guterres verified 31 specific cases of sexual abuse perpetrated by Israeli forces against Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank. These incidents, which occurred between 2022 and 2025, include reports of rape, gang rape, forced nudity, and genital violence involving men, women, and children. The UN noted that these findings represent only a fraction of the total incidents, citing significant obstruction by the Israeli government during investigative efforts.

In response to the inclusion, Israeli officials have vehemently rejected the allegations, with Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon labeling the report as a collection of antisemitic falsehoods. The Israeli government has signaled a formal break in relations with the secretary-general’s office, maintaining that its military and prison services operate in full accordance with international law. This development follows a series of high-profile controversies, including leaked CCTV footage from the Sde Teiman detention facility and subsequent reports from human rights organizations regarding a lack of accountability for soldiers accused of misconduct.

Simultaneously, the UN has blacklisted Russian armed and security forces for the first time due to widespread reports of sexual violence against prisoners of war and civilians in Ukraine. The report documented 310 instances of abuse, including rape and mutilation, occurring within Russia and Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories. While Ukrainian officials have characterized the report as a vital step toward accountability, the Russian government has yet to issue a formal public response to the findings.

The UN’s latest report highlights a growing global concern regarding the use of sexual violence as a tool of war. By placing both Israel and Russia on this list, international observers suggest a push for greater transparency and legal oversight in conflict zones. However, the effectiveness of such designations remains a point of contention, as both nations continue to challenge the validity of the evidence presented by international monitors.