RSS
Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Parent Company Unilever of Firing CEO Over Political Posts, Anti-Israel Activism
Tubs of ice cream are seen as a laborer works at a Ben & Jerry’s factory in Be’er Tuvia, Israel, July 20, 2021. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Ben & Jerry’s has accused parent company Unilever of firing its CEO in retaliation for the ice cream producer’s political activism on social media, which includes calling for a permanent ceasefire to end the Israel-Hamas war.
Ben & Jerry’s — which was founded in 1978 by Jewish childhood friends Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield — and five directors of its independent board filed a lawsuit against Unilever and its US subsidiary, the New York-based corporation Conopco, in federal court in November 2024, claiming the companies are censoring its public advocacy. The ice-cream maker accused Unilever, a conglomerate based in London, and Conopco of violating its 2000 merger agreement, which created the independent board and gave it “primary responsibility for Social Mission Priorities and the Essential Integrity of the Brand.” Ben & Jerry’s has a history of outspoken advocacy on topics of social justice and human rights, including climate change, LGBTQ+ rights, and Black Lives Matter.
The Vermont-based ice cream company filed an amended complaint in the Southern District of New York on Tuesday that accused Unilever and Conopco of continuing to censor its political posts on social media. In one recent instance, Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever “blocked” the company from posting a message in solidarity with pro-Hamas activist and former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil. Ben & Jerry’s wanted to write in support of free speech and link to a petition for Khalil’s release after he was arrested earlier this month by US authorities in accordance with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump cracking down on campus antisemitism and supporters of terrorist groups. Khalil’s deportation is pending a legal challenge by his lawyers.
Ben & Jerry’s also claimed Unilever stopped it from posting in December 2023 in support of a ceasefire to end the Israel-Hamas war that started two months earlier, after the deadly Hamas terrorist attacks in southern Israel. Unilever also allegedly stopped Ben & Jerry’s from posting on social media in support of Palestinian refugees in May 2024 because of the inappropriate timing of the message, since it would have coincided with an Iranian missile attack on Israel. Another claim is that Unilever did not let Ben & Jerry’s post in support of anti-Israel campus protests, which often turned violent, and their First Amendment rights in June 2024. Unilever’s response was that it had “reasonable concerns about the need to condemn the violence associated with the protests and support rights of Jewish students as well.”
“Unilever’s suppression of Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission has reached startling new levels of oppressiveness,” Ben & Jerry’s stated in its updated complaint this week. It also claimed Unilever was waging a “campaign of professional reprisals,” which led to the firing of Ben & Jerry’s CEO David Stever, who assumed the position in May 2023 after being a longtime tour guide for the company. Under Stever’s leadership, the company “outperformed Unilever’s ice cream portfolio” and was ranked #2 on the Brand 500 Authenticity Index in 2023 and 2024, according to Ben & Jerry’s.
“Contrary to their obligations under Section 6.14, Unilever has repeatedly threatened Ben & Jerry’s personnel, including CEO David Stever, should they fail to comply with Unilever’s efforts to silence the Social Mission. This month … Unilever followed through with their threats,” the lawsuit further stated.
Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever informed its board of directors about Stever’s firing on March 3, without following protocol outlined in the merger agreement, which says Unilever must consult with an advisory committee from the board before making decisions about the removal of a CEO. Ben & Jerry’s is accusing Unilever of removing Stever because of his “commitment to Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Essential Brand Integrity and his willingness to collaborate in good faith with the Independent Board, rather than any genuine concerns regarding his performance history.”
“Unilever has repeatedly failed to recognize and respect the Independent Board’ primary responsibility over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Brand Integrity, including threatening Ben & Jerry’s personnel should the company speak out regarding issues which that Unilever prefers to censor,” stated the amended complaint this week. The lawsuit alleges that Unilever executives previously criticized Stever in his January 2025 performance review for “repeatedly acquiesce[ing] to the demands of the Independent Social Mission Board” by permitting certain social media posts.
Ben & Jerry’s wants the court to order Unilever to “prospectively respect and acknowledge” its independent board and its authority. It also wants Unilever to comply with the merger agreement and its policy regarding the appointment and firing of a CEO.
Ben & Jerry’s also claimed in its lawsuit this week that Unilever has violated its settlement agreement with the ice cream company by blocking its donations to two anti-Israel organizations: Jewish Voice for Peace and the Council on American Islamic Relations last year. Ben & Jerry’s is asking the court to order Unilever to pay the company $5 million that it will then disbursement to human rights and humanitarian organizations of its choosing.
Unilever defended itself by saying that it “exercised its right to withhold consent to donate” after researching JVP and CAIR, and discovering that both groups have made “made inflammatory comments” about the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre in Israel.
A plaintiff included in the lawsuit against Unilever is Anuradha Mittal, chairman of Ben & Jerry’s independent board of directors. When Bloomberg News previously visited her office, it reported that it is decorated with a “Free Palestine” placard and a poster of two Palestinian men embracing next to a barbed wire fence. The poster included a message in Arabic that said, “Support the Intifada.” In 2018, on Israel’s Independence Day, Mittal tweeted, “The catastrophe continues #Nakba70 years later #palestine bleeds Boycott Divest Sanctions #israel.”
On Wednesday, Unilever filed a motion to dismiss Ben and Jerry’s complaint. The British conglomerate claimed in part that Ben & Jerry’s independent board members do not have the right to bring lawsuits on behalf of the company. Also, Ben & Jerry’s did not allege that it suffered any damages as a result of Unilever’s alleged breach of the settlement agreement, Unilever added.
Unilever noted that its issues with Ben & Jerry’s are a “direct result” of the board’s decision to get involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and share its opinions so publicly “without any regard to the negative impact” on both companies. Unilever insisted that if anything, Ben & Jerry’s decision in 2021 to stop selling its products in Israeli territories resulted in “severe consequences” for both companies.
In July 2020, Ben & Jerry’s independent board unanimously passed a resolution to end distribution of Ben & Jerry’s products in eastern Jerusalem and in the West Bank. The company made the announcement a year later in July 2021, saying in a released statement: “We believe it is inconsistent with our values for Ben & Jerry’s ice cream to be sold in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
The announcement led to “multiple lawsuits” in the US and Israel targeting Unilever for being in violation of laws against the anti-Israel boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, as well as accusations of antisemitism, “severe” sanctions, and the divestment of “hundreds of millions of dollars” in Unilever’s stock, Unilever claimed in its motion to dismiss on Wednesday.
“Unilever … continues — to this day — to suffer the consequences of that decision. B&J’s and/or Unilever still remain on at least nine states’ anti-BDS lists and Indonesia has a ‘fatwah’ on Unilever. These are just two examples of the world-wide response to the Board’s decision that have negatively impacted B&J’s and Unilever,” the company stated. “Unilever continues to support B&J’s and its social advocacy work. Over time, the social mission of B&J’s shifted, but in recent years it has come to a head as B&J’s seeks to advocate for one-sided, highly controversial, and polarizing topics that put Unilever, B&J’s, and their employees at risk.”
In 2022, Unilever sold its Ben & Jerry’s property rights to a local distributor in Israel, who resumed selling the ice cream products in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank with Hebrew and Arabic labeling. Ben & Jerry’s sued Unilever for its actions. The 2022 lawsuit ended with a settlement agreement that requires Unilever to “respect and acknowledge the Ben & Jerry’s Independent Board’s primary responsibility over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Essential Brand Integrity” and “work in good faith with the Independent Board to ensure that both are protected and furthered.”
The post Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Parent Company Unilever of Firing CEO Over Political Posts, Anti-Israel Activism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives
FILE PHOTO: Boulder attack suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman poses for a jail booking photograph after his arrest in Boulder, Colorado, U.S. June 2, 2025. Photo: Boulder Police Department/Handout via REUTERS
A suspect in an attack on a pro-Israeli rally in Colorado that injured eight people was being held on Monday on an array of charges, including assault and the use of explosives, in lieu of a $10-million bail, according to Boulder County records.
The posted list of felony charges against suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, in the attack on Sunday also includes charges of murder in the first degree, although police in the city of Boulder have said on social media that no victims died in the attack. Authorities could not be reached immediately to clarify.
Witnesses reported the suspect used a makeshift flamethrower and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. He was heard to yell “Free Palestine” during the attack, according to the FBI, in what the agency called a “targeted terror attack.”
Four women and four men between 52 and 88 years of age were transported to hospitals after the attack, Boulder Police said.
The attack took place on the Pearl Street Mall, a popular pedestrian shopping district near the University of Colorado, during an event organized by Run for Their Lives, an organization devoted to drawing attention to the hostages seized in the aftermath of Hamas’ 2023 attack on Israel.
Rabbi Yisroel Wilhelm, the Chabad director at the University of Colorado, Boulder, told CBS Colorado that the 88-year-old victim was a Holocaust refugee who fled Europe.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said Soliman had entered the country in August 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023. He filed for asylum in September 2022. “The suspect, Mohamed Soliman, is illegally in our country,” the spokesperson said.
The FBI raided and searched Soliman’s home in El Paso County, Colorado, the agency said on social media. “As this is an ongoing investigation, no additional information is available at this time.”
The attack in Boulder was the latest act of violence aimed at Jewish Americans linked to outrage over Israel’s escalating military offensive in Gaza. It followed the fatal shooting of two Israel Embassy aides that took place outside Washington’s Capital Jewish Museum last month.
Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, said after the shooting there was a question of how far security perimeters outside Jewish institutions should extend.
Boulder Police said they would hold a press conference later on Monday to discuss details of the Colorado attack.
The Denver office of the FBI, which is handling the case, did not immediately respond to emails or phone calls seeking clarification on the homicide charges or other details in the case.
Officials from the Boulder County Jail, Boulder Police and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The post Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS
Iran is poised to reject a US proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment.
“Iran is drafting a negative response to the US proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the US offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating talks between Tehran and Washington.
After five rounds of discussions between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, several obstacles remain.
Among them are Iran’s rejection of a US demand that it commit to scrapping uranium enrichment and its refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
“In this proposal, the US stance on enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation regarding the lifting of sanctions,” said the diplomat, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Araqchi said Tehran would formally respond to the proposal soon.
Tehran demands the immediate removal of all US-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But the US says nuclear-related sanctions should be removed in phases.
Dozens of institutions vital to Iran’s economy, including its central bank and national oil company, have been blacklisted since 2018 for, according to Washington, “supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation.”
Trump’s revival of “maximum pressure” against Tehran since his return to the White House in January has included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
During his first term in 2018, Trump ditched Tehran’s 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact’s limits.
Under the deal, Iran had until 2018 curbed its sensitive nuclear work in return for relief from US, EU and U.N. economic sanctions.
The diplomat said the assessment of “Iran’s nuclear negotiations committee,” under the supervision of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was that the US proposal was “completely one-sided” and could not serve Tehran’s interests.
Therefore, the diplomat said, Tehran considers this proposal a “non-starter” and believes it unilaterally attempts to impose a “bad deal” on Iran through excessive demands.
NUCLEAR STANDOFF RAISES MIDDLE EAST TENSIONS
The stakes are high for both sides. Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran’s clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of the devastating sanctions.
Iran says it is ready to accept some limits on enrichment, but needs watertight guarantees that Washington would not renege on a future nuclear accord.
Two Iranian officials told Reuters last week that Iran could pause uranium enrichment if the US released frozen Iranian funds and recognized Tehran’s right to refine uranium for civilian use under a “political deal” that could lead to a broader nuclear accord.
Iran’s arch-foe Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and says it would never allow Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Araqchi, in a joint news conference with his Egyptian counterpart in Cairo, said: “I do not think Israel will commit such a mistake as to attack Iran.”
Tehran’s regional influence has meanwhile been diminished by military setbacks suffered by its forces and those of its allies in the Shi’ite-dominated “Axis of Resistance,” which include Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iraqi militias.
In April, Saudi Arabia’s defence minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian officials to take Trump’s offer of a new deal seriously as a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
The post Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, May 7, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stephanie Lecocq/Pool
The dramatic fall of the Assad regime in Syria has undeniably reshaped the Middle East, yet the emerging power dynamics, particularly the alignment between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, warrant profound scrutiny from those committed to American and Israeli security. While superficially presented as a united front against Iranian influence, this new Sunni axis carries a dangerous undercurrent of Islamism and regional ambition that could ultimately undermine, rather than serve, the long-term interests of Washington and Jerusalem.
For too long, Syria under Bashar al-Assad served as a critical conduit for Iran’s destabilizing agenda, facilitating arms transfers to Hezbollah and projecting Tehran’s power across the Levant. The removal of this linchpin is, on the surface, a strategic victory. However, the nature of the new Syrian government, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa — a figure Israeli officials continue to view with deep suspicion due to his past as a former Al-Qaeda-linked commander — raises immediate red flags. This is not merely a change of guard; it is a shift that introduces a new set of complex challenges, particularly given Turkey’s historical support for the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization deemed a terror group by Saudi Arabia and many other regional states.
Israel’s strategic calculus in Syria has always been clear: to degrade Iran’s military presence, prevent Hezbollah from acquiring advanced weaponry, and maintain operational freedom in Syrian airspace. Crucially, Israel has historically thought it best to have a decentralized, weak, and fragmented Syria, with reports that it has actively worked against the resurgence of a robust central authority. This preference stems from a pragmatic understanding that a strong, unified Syria, especially one under the tutelage of an ambitious regional power like Turkey, could pose much more of a threat than the Assad regime ever did. Indeed, Israeli defense officials privately express concern at Turkey’s assertive moves, accusing Ankara of attempting to transform post-war Syria into a Turkish protectorate under Islamist tutelage. This concern is not unfounded; Turkey’s ambitious, arguably expansionist, objectives — and its perceived undue dominance in Arab lands — are viewed by Israel as warily as Iran’s previous influence.
The notion that an “Ottoman Crescent” is now replacing the “Shiite Crescent” should not be celebrated as a net positive. While it may diminish Iranian power, it introduces a new form of regional hegemony, one driven by an ideology that has historically been antithetical to Western values and stability. The European Union’s recent imposition of sanctions on Turkish-backed Syrian army commanders for human rights abuses, including arbitrary killings and torture, further underscores the problematic nature of some elements within this new Syrian landscape. The fact that al-Sharaa has allowed such individuals to operate with impunity and even promoted them to high-ranking positions should give Washington pause.
From an American perspective, while the Trump administration has pragmatically engaged with the new Syrian government, lifting sanctions and urging normalization with Israel, this engagement must be tempered with extreme caution. The core American interests in the Middle East — counterterrorism, containment of Iran, and regional stability — are not served by empowering Islamist-leaning factions or by enabling a regional power, like Turkey, whose actions have sometimes undermined the broader fight against ISIS. Washington must demand that Damascus demonstrate a genuine commitment to taking over the counter-ISIS mission and managing detention facilities, and unequivocally insist that Turkey cease actions that risk an ISIS resurgence.
The argument that Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite their own complex internal dynamics, are simply pragmatic actors countering Iran overlooks the ideological underpinnings that concern many conservatives. Turkey’s ruling party, rooted in political Islam, and its historical ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, present a fundamental challenge to the vision of a stable, secular, and pro-Western Middle East. While Saudi Arabia has designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, its alignment with Turkey in Syria, and its own internal human rights record, means that this “new front” is far from a clean solution.
The Saudi-Turkey alignment in Syria is a double-edged sword. While it may indeed serve to counter Iran’s immediate regional ambitions, it simultaneously risks empowering actors whose long-term objectives and ideological leanings are deeply problematic for American, Israeli, and Western interests. Washington and Jerusalem must approach this new dynamic with extreme vigilance, prioritizing the containment of all forms of radicalism — whether Shiite or Sunni — and ensuring that any strategic gains against Iran do not inadvertently pave the way for a new, equally dangerous, Islamist crescent to rise in the heart of the Levant.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger first appeared on Algemeiner.com.