Since the Israel-Hamas war began in October, Nayera Ahmed, a 19-year-old mass communications student in Cairo, has stopped hanging out at her local Starbucks. The US coffee chain has appeared on several consumer boycott lists being circulated on Egyptian social media.
“Me and my friends, we used to go to Starbucks all the time, now it’s a shame if you’re seen at one of those,” Ahmed said. “It’s the least we can do. Why would I buy from these Western companies?”
It is a trend playing out in parts of the Middle East and even beyond. Driven by a wellspring of anger against the US and Europe for not doing more to get Israel to end its offensive in Gaza, many shoppers in the region as well as Muslim nations like Pakistan are shunning big foreign brands, damping sales of some and creating PR headaches for others.
Illustration: Yusha
In Cairo, on a recent weekday, dozens of usually bustling Starbucks and McDonald’s stores visited by Bloomberg stood completely empty. The manufacturer of a local Egyptian soda brand said its sales have tripled since the war began because consumers are shunning Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
In recent weeks, McDonald’s Corp chief executive officer Chris Kempczinski has warned that his firm is seeing “meaningful business impact” in the Middle East due to misinformation spreading about his company.
SHARE PRICE
Meanwhile, shares of Americana Restaurants International PLC — the Middle East franchise operator for KFC, Pizza Hut, Krispy Kreme and Hardee’s — declined as much as 27 percent on the Saudi stock exchange in the months after the war started, with some analysts predicting a hit to its profits from boycotts.
It is a backlash that reflects a new era of crisis management for the world’s biggest consumer brands — and particularly American ones — as emotionally charged shoppers conflate their businesses with government policies. Companies have issued public statements to emphasize their political neutrality. Yet the movement has steadily picked up steam in the three months since the war began, with boycott calls still spreading.
YOUTH
London School of Economics Middle Eastern politics professor Fawaz Gerges said the present boycotts are particularly striking because they are intense, transnational and led by youthful populations.
“So far, whether McDonald’s or Starbucks, they’re hurting,” since young people who are the big spenders are conscious of what’s happening and they feel very active and invested, Gerges said. A perception that Washington favors Israel “really affects these corporations because America is implicated and the CEOs are part of this American empire —- commercial, financial, soft-power empire.”
Amid rising geopolitical upheaval, global brands are increasingly being forced to grapple with polarizing scenarios amplified across borders by social media. Over the past two years, dozens of companies, from McDonald’s to Coca-Cola Co, have pulled out of Russia amid global criticism of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
The Middle East offers brands tens of millions of young consumers to drive growth at a time when developed markets are saturated. Still, the region has particularly deep political and operational complexities. The war started when Hamas militants from Gaza rampaged through southern Israel on Oct. 7 last year, killing 1,200 people. Israel’s retaliatory offensive on Gaza has killed more than 25,000 people, health officials in the Hamas-run territory said. The dire situation has inflamed tensions in the Middle East and led to an outpouring of support for Palestinians. The US and EU consider Hamas a terrorist organization and it is still holding more than 100 hostages from its incursion.
While US and EU officials have supported Israel’s right to protect itself, they have begun ramping up calls to protect civilians in Gaza and pushed for a two-state solution with the Palestinians.
TRANSNATIONAL
On Jan. 11, hours before facing airstrikes from the US and UK, the Houthi rebels conducting shipping attacks in the Red Sea in support of the Palestinians called for consumers in the Middle East to keep shunning foreign goods. “The scope of the boycott of American and Israeli goods must expand in the Gulf countries,” Abdul Malik al-Houthi, the militant organization’s head, said in a televised speech.
In Jordan, many Starbucks and McDonald’s stores are still standing largely empty even though boycotts began in October. Onlookers usually see only empty stools and booths occupied by workers, with cashiers slouched at their counters. Supermarkets in Jordan also have tags hanging on a large number of foreign brands describing them as “boycotted goods.” In Kuwait, normally packed Starbucks outlets in busy areas have seen trickles of walk-in customers since early October. The boycott has boosted sales for homegrown coffee stores.
Starbucks referred Bloomberg News to statements posted on its website, including one that reads: “We have no political agenda. We do not use our profits to fund any government or military operations anywhere – and never have.” It has no stores in Israel.
The hit to sales could lessen the appetite of franchisees to expand in parts of the Middle East, Kalinowski Equity Research president and chief executive officer Mark Kalinowski said, though the geographical diversification of brands like McDonald’s would limit the impact on total results.
LOCAL BUSINESS
Meanwhile, several local Middle Eastern businesses said they are profiting from the pushback against overseas brands. Moath Fauri, the founder of Astrolabe, a Jordanian coffee chain, is cutting out US and French products as much as possible across seven branches in Amman and sourcing ingredients like flavored syrups regionally.
He says his business has boomed after the boycotts, with sales surging 30 percent at some locations as locals snubbed Starbucks. In Egypt, Spiro Spathis, a 100-year-old local soda brand, which had been struggling to revive its waning popularity, has seen sales skyrocket over the past three months, its commercial director Youssef Atwan said. “Suddenly we were bombarded with orders from supermarkets, restaurants, we were trying hard to cope with the demand,” Atwan said. “Clients would go to restaurants and either ask for our brand or at least refuse to drink those on the boycott list.”
With more than 105 million people, Egypt is the region’s most populous nation, with 60 percent of its people below the age of 30. Brands there are up against the zeal of consumers like Sara El-Masry, a project manager in a cultural organization, who has completely changed her consumption habits since the war started.
Her favorite dishwasher tablet brand was Fairy, which is manufactured by Procter & Gamble Co. However, since October, El-Masry has stopped buying the product, which is also on a boycott list. Looking for an alternative, a relative gave her a recipe to make at home. She now mixes baking soda, citric acid and dish soap and packs it in an ice cube tray to create her own dishwashing soap. P&G did not comment.
In Turkey, some officials have pushed for a boycott of Coca-Cola. While the drink is still widely available in supermarkets and restaurants, the Turkish parliament in November said it would remove Coke from its cafeterias.
The impact would become clearer when the US soda companies report earnings next month, but a plunge in sales of Coke’s Turkey distributor, where fourth-quarter volumes fell 22 percent, “certainly raises a red flag,” CFRA Research analyst Garrett Nelson said. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo did not comment.
Fallouts from boycotts have been seen largely in countries like Jordan, Kuwait and Egypt. In the United Arab Emirates — home to only about 10 million people, many of whom are expats — there has been little dramatic impact seen.
However, even there some small-business owners have chosen to take a stand. Bait Maryam, a Dubai restaurant, replaced all fizzy drinks with local brands in early October. A spokesperson said its customers support the change.
In the Middle East’s largest economy, Saudi Arabia, the effects have been harder to assess. There have been few public calls for boycotts on social media in the kingdom, where the government tries to control most types of activism. Yet several outlets for US chains visited by Bloomberg News stood largely empty.
politics
The Middle East’s boycotts “are ultimately a low-risk form of protest in a region with a very low tolerance for activism,” said Robert Mogielnicki, a researcher at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington.
McDonald’s became the target of boycotts in parts of the region after photos and videos on social media showed franchised stores in Israel giving meals to the nation’s soldiers following the Oct. 7 attack.
After that, the brand’s Saudi Arabia franchisee issued statements expressing sympathy for Palestinians and donated 2 million Saudi riyals (US$533,000) to Gaza relief efforts. Franchisees in other countries with large Muslim populations took similar actions.
McDonald’s Corp is not funding or supporting any governments involved in this conflict, the company said. “We are dismayed by the disinformation and inaccurate reports regarding our position in response to the conflict in the Middle East,” the chain said in an e-mailed statement. Independent franchisees operate their business in the region and make their own decisions.
The problems for brands have extended beyond the Middle East. In Pakistan, posters describing large multinational brands, including US ones like Pepsi and Coca-Cola, as Israeli products have circulated.
European brands like French supermarket chain Carrefour SA, which last year entered Israel via a partnership with a local player, have also appeared on the list of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement, which calls for broad economic and cultural boycotts of Israel and Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Carrefour declined to comment. The grocery chain is present in nine Middle Eastern countries including Jordan and Egypt via a local partner as well.
Americana Restaurants, the largest operator of US restaurant chains in the Middle East, is expected to see a short-term negative impact on sales and earnings from the boycotts, Aljazira Capital senior analyst Fahad Irfan Qureshi said. “This is driving the negative stock performance,” the analyst said, adding that earnings should recover eventually. In a statement, Americana said it would provide details on its business performance in its upcoming full-year results for last year.
“At times, people disagree with US policy, and what’s a way that they vent their rage? One way is they stop buying from brands that are headquartered in America,” Kalinowski said.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS