Ben & Jerry’s co-founder accuses Unilever of blocking Palestine-themed ice cream flavor launch

Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen claims Unilever stopped a planned Palestine-themed flavor

Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen has accused Unilever, the brand’s parent company, of preventing the creation of an ice cream flavor intended to support Palestine.

In a statement shared on Instagram, Cohen announced plans to release a watermelon sorbet flavor through his independent company, Ben’s Best, as a gesture of solidarity with Palestinians. The announcement follows what Cohen described as Unilever’s refusal to allow Ben & Jerry’s to produce a similar flavor that would have called for “peace in Palestine.”

“Ben & Jerry’s tried to make a flavor to stand for justice and dignity for everyone,” Cohen said in the video. “But they weren’t allowed to. So I’m doing what they couldn’t.” He added that the new flavor symbolizes “permanent peace in Palestine” and aims to raise awareness of the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the West Bank.

Watermelon has become an emblem of Palestinian solidarity due to its colors mirroring the Palestinian flag. Cohen’s campaign also includes a call for Unilever to “set the company free,” referencing his long-running dispute with the conglomerate over what he views as restrictions on Ben & Jerry’s social activism.

Ben & Jerry’s has been owned by Unilever since 2000, under its Magnum ice cream division, which is expected to become an independent company. Although the brand’s founders, Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, retained partial control over its social mission, they have repeatedly clashed with Unilever over political expression.

Unilever confirmed that Ben & Jerry’s independent board members had proposed a new flavor but said the management decided against it. “Ben & Jerry’s management has determined it is not the right time to invest in developing this product,” a spokesperson told The Independent.

Cohen’s campaign follows Greenfield’s recent departure from the company after nearly 50 years, citing concern that Unilever was limiting the brand’s activism.