Five years after American ice cream company Ben & Jerry's announced it would stop selling its products in the Occupied Territories, the brand's Israeli operation—now under new ownership—has launched a flavor explicitly designed to appeal to nationalist sentiment, featuring tiny fudge pieces shaped like Stars of David.
The new flavor, called Milk and Honey, is available only in Israel and is described as aimed at resonating with local cultural sentiments. The move represents a stark reversal from the company's 2021 ethical stance on settlement sales.
From Boycott to Buyout
Ben & Jerry's 2021 announcement that it would cease sales in the Occupied Territories sparked immediate political backlash in Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu publicly defended the need to provide settlers with Cherry Garcia, framing ice cream access as a matter of national importance. The controversy ultimately led Ben & Jerry's parent corporation Unilever to sell the local operation to an Israeli businessman, effectively ending the company's control over its own brand standards in the region.
The sale allowed Unilever to distance itself from the political firestorm while ensuring that Ben & Jerry's products would continue flowing to settlements—the very outcome the original announcement sought to prevent.
Cultural Symbolism and Market Strategy
The Milk and Honey flavor goes beyond simply resuming sales in contested areas. By incorporating Stars of David into the product itself and marketing it as culturally resonant, the new ownership has transformed the brand from one associated with progressive values into one actively celebrating nationalist symbolism. The flavor's name invokes biblical language often used to describe the promised land, while its Star of David fudge pieces make explicit political and religious statements with every scoop.
This repositioning reflects how corporate acquisitions can fundamentally alter a brand's values when parent companies prioritize market access over ethical commitments. What began as a company taking a stand on human rights in occupied territory has ended with that same brand name being used to market products specifically designed to appeal to the settlement enterprise.
Why This Matters:
This case illustrates how corporate accountability on human rights can be undermined when parent companies face political pressure. Ben & Jerry's built its reputation on progressive values and ethical sourcing, yet when those principles conflicted with market access in Israel, Unilever chose divestment over defending the subsidiary's stance. The result is a brand that once refused to profit from occupation now actively marketing to that very constituency. For consumers who supported Ben & Jerry's original decision, the transformation demonstrates the limits of corporate social responsibility when not backed by binding commitments. It also shows how brands can be weaponized: the same name that once signaled ethical consumption now adorns products celebrating the settlements it once refused to serve, potentially misleading consumers about the values their purchases support.