Ben & Jerry’s has said it disagrees with parent company Unilever’s move to end a row over ice cream sales in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, highlighting the discord between the Vermont-based manufacturer and the UK consumer goods group.
On Wednesday Unilever announced it was selling its Ben & Jerry’s business in Israel to a local licensee, overriding an earlier decision by the brand to stop sales in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in an apparent protest at Israeli occupation.
Ben & Jerry’s, which was acquired by Unilever in 2000 but retained an independent board, said: “While our parent company has taken this decision, we do not agree with it . . . We continue to believe it is inconsistent with Ben & Jerry’s values for our ice cream to be sold in the occupied Palestinian territory.”
The sale to Avi Zinger’s American Quality Products brought to an end a year-long dispute over the Ben & Jerry’s policy, which had attracted a lawsuit and a ferocious reaction from the Israeli government and US politicians.
Ben & Jerry’s had previously said it would not renew AQP’s licence to distribute the ice cream. At the time, Unilever said the brand’s policy was made “in line with the acquisition agreement that we signed 20 years ago”.
An unusual structure was put in place at the time of the Unilever acquisition, with the ice cream company retaining an independent board to promote its “social mission”. This arrangement had been regarded as an example of a brand being able to preserve its culture after selling out to a multinational.
However, the opposition to the sale from Ben & Jerry’s has called into question how much autonomy its independent board is able to exercise in practice.
The protest by Ben & Jerry’s over Unilever’s decision appears to show the limits of the brand’s independence — although it can dissent publicly it did not threaten any action in response.
Unilever on Wednesday referred to the acquisition agreement, saying that the UK group had “reserved primary responsibility for financial and operational decisions and therefore has the right to enter this arrangement” with Zinger.
Unilever said on Wednesday it had listened to “perspectives on this complex and sensitive matter” and believed the sale was the “best outcome”. The listed group added that its review had included consultations with the Israeli government, which last year had angrily opposed the decision to stop sales after a deal with the local distributor expired.
