The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has once again drawn global attention to the Middle East, sparking widespread international outcry and various forms of protest. Among these, one of the most potent and visible has been the boycott of brands perceived as supporting Israel. This article explores the motivations behind these boycotts, their implementation, and their impact, particularly in Bangladesh, where the boycott has gained significant traction against Coca-Cola.
The Context of the Boycott
The Israel-Hamas conflict is a deeply rooted and complex issue that has witnessed numerous violent escalations over the decades. Hamas, a Palestinian Islamist militant group, governing the Gaza Strip, has been involved in periodic violent clashes with Israel, resulting in significant loss of life and humanitarian crises. The most recent flare-up has heightened tensions and increased violence, prompting international concern and action.
In response, many individuals and groups worldwide have initiated boycotts of brands they believe are complicit in supporting the Israeli government’s actions against Palestinians. These boycotts aim to exert economic pressure on Israel by targeting companies seen as supporting or benefiting from its policies.
The Rise of the Boycott Movement
The modern boycott movement has been significantly bolstered by technology and social media. Apps like Bilzamish, meaning “unnecessary” in Arabic, allow users to identify brands and products associated with Israel, providing reasons for their inclusion in the boycott list. Social media platforms amplify these messages, spreading awareness and mobilizing support more effectively than ever before.
Boycotting American Brands in Jordan
Jordan, a country with a significant population of Palestinian origin, has been a focal point for these boycott movements. NPR’s Jane Arraf reported on the effects of the boycott in Jordan, highlighting its impact on American brands and local businesses.
- McDonald’s: Despite being locally owned franchises, McDonald’s outlets in Jordan have faced significant backlash, exacerbated after McDonald’s Israel donated thousands of free meals to the Israeli military. In Amman, the capital of Jordan, McDonald’s drive-thrus, usually bustling with activity, have seen a sharp decline in customers.
- Coca-Cola and Pepsi: Similar impacts are observed in local supermarkets, where Coca-Cola and Pepsi are now relegated to separate coolers with signs indicating that these items are boycotted. This boycott has opened the market for local competitors such as Matrix, a Jordanian cola brand that has seen its production double since the boycott began.
- Starbucks: Another major American brand, Starbucks, has also felt the effects of the boycott. Despite not having any branches in Israel, Starbucks has been targeted due to perceived associations with Israeli support. In contrast, local coffee chains like Astrolabe have thrived, experiencing a 30-40% increase in business since the boycott began.
Motivations Behind the Boycott
The motivations driving the boycott of brands related to Israel are multifaceted, rooted in ethical, political, and humanitarian concerns.
- Human Rights Concerns: Many boycott supporters view the Israeli military actions in Gaza and the West Bank as severe human rights violations. They cite high civilian casualties, the destruction of homes, and the ongoing blockade of Gaza as reasons for their protest.
- Solidarity with Palestinians: The boycott is seen as a way to show solidarity with Palestinians who are perceived to be suffering under Israeli policies. It is a non-violent means of supporting their cause and standing against what is seen as oppression.
- Economic and Political Pressure: By targeting major brands, boycott proponents aim to exert economic pressure on Israel. The hope is that this pressure will translate into political action, encouraging the Israeli government to change its policies and engage in meaningful peace negotiations.
- Raising Awareness: The boycott also serves to raise global awareness about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It brings the issue to the forefront of international discourse, encouraging more people to become informed and engaged.
The Impact in Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, the boycott movement has gained significant traction, particularly against Coca-Cola. The impact of the boycott in Bangladesh provides a microcosm of how effective these protests can be in influencing consumer behavior and corporate strategy.
Coca-Cola’s fortunes in Bangladesh have suffered significantly due to the boycott movement. The company faced backlash after an advertisement was perceived as tone-deaf for claiming its factory was in Palestine while omitting that it was on occupied land. This controversy exacerbated an already declining sales trend. In early 2023, Coca-Cola’s sales in Bangladesh decreased by as much as 60%, reflecting the broader impact of the boycott in Muslim-majority countries.
Market research indicates that Coca-Cola, which previously held a dominant position with a 42% share of the cola market in Bangladesh, has experienced a significant decline, losing at least 23% of its market share since the Israel-Palestine conflict began.
As Coca-Cola faces backlash, local brands like Mojo are capitalizing on the opportunity to grow their market share. The boycott has provided a unique opening for Mojo, a domestic cola brand produced by Akij Food and Beverage Ltd. Mojo has seen a 39% growth in sales since the campaign started in January, with its market share increasing to 39%. Mojo’s campaign to donate directly to Palestine has significantly boosted its popularity among Bangladeshi consumers.
Global Impact on Multinational Brands
The boycott movement against brands associated with Israel has had a global impact, influencing multinational corporations beyond just Coca-Cola. Several major American brands have been significantly affected by the boycott campaigns across different regions.
- McDonald’s: The fast-food giant faced substantial backlash after its Israel-based locations offered free meals to Israeli soldiers. This led to boycotts in the Middle East and Muslim-majority countries, contributing to a notable decline in sales. McDonald’s reported growth of only 0.7% in these regions in the last quarter of 2023, far below the expected 5.5%. The company has had to navigate complex PR challenges to mitigate the impact of these boycotts.
- Starbucks: The coffee giant has also been deeply affected by the boycott movement. Despite not having any branches in Israel, Starbucks was targeted due to perceived associations with Israeli support, especially after Starbucks Workers United declared solidarity with Palestine. This resulted in significant damage to the company’s reputation and sales, particularly in the Middle East. Starbucks CEO Laxman Narasimhan reported a significant impact on traffic and sales in the region, leading to a downward adjustment of the company’s full-year sales forecast.
- Zara: The fashion brand Zara faced boycotts over a controversial advertising campaign that was perceived to mock the suffering of Palestinians. Although some boycott calls were fueled by disinformation, the overall impact on Zara’s brand image and sales in regions observing the boycott was significant.
- Domino’s: The pizza chain Domino’s faced boycotts over unverified claims of providing free food to Israeli soldiers. This led to a decline in sales, particularly in Malaysia, where consumers associate the brand with the U.S., an Israeli ally.
- Coca-Cola: In addition to the situation in Bangladesh, Coca-Cola has faced broader global impacts. The company’s sales in Turkey dropped by 22% in the last quarter of 2023, and the boycott has significantly affected its market presence in other Muslim-majority countries. Historical affiliations with Israel have made Coca-Cola a recurring target of boycott campaigns, further complicating its market strategy.
The Role of Disinformation in Boycotts
While the boycott movement has gained significant traction, it is not immune to the influence of disinformation. In some cases, boycotts are based on inaccurate or misleading information, which can complicate the movement’s objectives and impact.
- Zara and AI-generated Disinformation: A notable example is the boycott against Zara. A video showing Zara clothes being dumped in Times Square to protest against a controversial ad campaign was widely circulated on social media. However, this video was later revealed to be AI-generated and unrelated to Zara’s advertising. The original clip was part of a different campaign by a second-hand fashion platform and had no connection to the Israel-Palestine conflict. This instance of disinformation misled many consumers and fueled unwarranted outrage against Zara.
- Starbucks in Morocco: Similarly, false claims that Starbucks had to shut down in Morocco due to the boycott were debunked. The allegations, which spread through social media, cited a supposed article from a Moroccan newspaper. However, further investigation revealed that Starbucks continued to operate all its stores in the country, and the claims were based on misinformation.
These examples highlight the challenges the boycott movement faces in ensuring accurate information guides consumer actions. Disinformation can undermine the legitimacy of the boycott and distract from its core humanitarian and political objectives.
The Broader Impact and Future of Boycotts
While the immediate financial impact of these boycotts on brands like McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, and Starbucks is evident, analysts caution against attributing long-term business declines solely to boycott actions. The broader economic environment and consumer sentiment also play significant roles. However, successful boycotts can maintain momentum by making consumers feel their actions are impactful, potentially leading to sustained pressure on targeted brands.
In addition to business boycotts, the movement has extended to cultural and sporting institutions, with calls to exclude Israel from events like the Olympics and Eurovision. These actions reflect a broader strategy to isolate Israel internationally and pressure it to change its policies.
The Role of the BDS Movement
The BDS movement plays a crucial role in organizing and endorsing boycotts against companies complicit in violating Palestinian rights. Inspired by the South African anti-apartheid movement, BDS seeks to exert pressure on Israel to comply with international law and ensure Palestinian rights. The movement strategically targets companies like HP, Chevron, and Siemens, as well as brands like McDonald’s and Starbucks, which have become “organic boycott targets” due to public support for the boycotts.
Conclusion
The global boycott movement against brands associated with the Israel-Hamas conflict illustrates the growing power of consumers in political and social arenas. As these boycotts gain traction, they not only impact brand sales and reputation but also force companies to navigate complex geopolitical landscapes. The effectiveness of these boycotts in driving long-term change remains to be seen, but their immediate impact on multinational companies is undeniable. Brands must carefully balance their corporate values with the diverse political and social sentiments of their global consumer base to navigate this challenging environment successfully.