In order to make money while advertising their own moral superiority, many investment firms make a point of seeking to put their clients’ money in concerns that received good marks in “environmental, social, and corporate-governance” (ESG) terms. This means, in practice, that financial-services companies like Morningstar issue ESG ratings—based on the political flavors of the day—that then shape the decisions of investors. Morningstar’s ESG arm has come under fire, and also found itself running afoul of the laws of various states, for considering doing business with Israeli Jews a sign of social irresponsibility. Richard Goldberg comments:

Morningstar [recently] reaffirmed negative ratings for seven Israeli firms due to their operations in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, or their support for Israeli counterterrorism operations. Now it’s up to governors, attorneys general, and treasurers to rid this company of Israel boycotts once and for all.

Spain-based Construcciónes y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF) is, [for instance] subject to a human-rights-controversy rating because it builds and operates trams in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. . . . Morningstar said CAF, like Bezeq and B Communications, [to which it gave similar bad ratings], was contributing to the maintenance and expansion of “settlements”—suggesting it is company policy to consider eastern Jerusalem, including the Western Wall, to be an Israeli “settlement” rather than Israel’s capital. Morningstar’s spokesperson also compared CAF helping Israel to expand light-rail access for Israeli-Arabs in Jerusalem to involvement in “rail projects that support Myanmar’s junta as it uses trains to move its troops, arms, and other supplies.”

In all these cases, Morningstar makes no allegation that these companies are involved in any violation of human rights. Instead, the alleged violation is merely providing non-controversial services or infrastructure in specific territory controlled by Israel. . . . This could trigger divestment and contracting bans in certain U.S. states, whose laws consider differential treatment of companies operating in Israeli-controlled territory to be a form of boycott.

This week, there have been numerous unconfirmed reports about the fate of Esmail Qaani, who is the head of the Quds Force, the expeditionary arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. Benny Avni writes:

On Thursday, Sky News Arabic reported that Mr. Qaani was rushed to a hospital after suffering a heart attack. He became [the Quds Force] commander in 2020, after an American drone strike killed his predecessor, Qassem Suleimani. The unit oversees the Islamic Republic’s various Mideast proxies, as well as the exporting of the Iranian revolution to the region and beyond.

The Sky News report attempts to put to rest earlier claims that Mr. Qaani was killed at Beirut. It follows several reports asserting he has been arrested and interrogated at Tehran over suspicion that he, or a top lieutenant, leaked information to Israel. Five days ago, the Arabic-language al-Arabiya network reported that Mr. Qaani “is under surveillance and isolation, following the Israeli assassinations of prominent Iranian leaders.”

Iranians are desperately scrambling to plug possible leaks that gave Israel precise intelligence to conduct pinpoint strikes against Hizballah commanders. . . . “I find it hard to believe that Qaani was compromised,” an Iran watcher at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, Beni Sabti, tells the Sun. Perhaps one or more of [Qaani’s] top aides have been recruited by Israel, he says, adding that “psychological warfare” could well be stoking the rumor mill.

If so, prominent Iranians seem to be exacerbating the internal turmoil by alleging that the country’s security apparatus has been infiltrated.