• MxM111
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    From the article:

    “The company said that if it were to abandon its business and brands in Russia, “they would be appropriated – and then operated – by the Russian state”. Unilever said it had not been able to find a way to sell the business that “avoids the Russian state potentially gaining further benefit, and which safeguards our people”. It said in that light, continuing to run the business with “strict constraints” was the best option.”

    Of course they are making profits there. But I suspect if they simply exit, that those profits would be made by whoever takes the business. Which would be some of the Kremlin oligarchs. It is “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation.

    • @schroedingershat
      link
      131 year ago

      No it’s not. Leave and destroy every asset you can’t take with you.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      No it’s not. Unilever owns the supply chain and this should stop too. it is just keeping this going until sanctions are lifted and then being the only one present. Unilever has shown multiple times they are in it for the shareholders all the way.

      • @MercuryUprising
        link
        61 year ago

        Unilever created its empire using Congolese slave labor under Belgian control between 1911 and 1945. Genocide and human rights abuses are literally built into the foundation of the company. Don’t believe their bullshit PR speak.

    • @whatsarefoogee
      link
      41 year ago

      It’s just an excuse. You should never take corporate PR at their word. Especially if it boils down to “We have no choice but to continue making tons of money”.