النهار

“Power that controls the economy should be in the hands of elected representatives of the people instead of an industrial oligarchy” _ William O. Douglas.

Economists have been stuffed with the power of the invisible hand in the economy and the “laissez-faire” concepts of Adam Smith and other capitalistic economists and philosophers. However, the oligarchy created in these systems have always beaten the power of the invisible hands. In fact, oligarchs, the people with “the wealth” became the people in real power, whether implicitly or explicitly. Some narratives indicate that even Hitler have used German oligarch allies to reach the top of the pyramid.

In a nutshell, in the womb of capitalistic markets, powerful oligarchs have taken over the world and displayed economic colonialism in the MENA region. As a reaction to the war in Gaza, the Arabs, Muslims, and Pro-Palestinian movements have initiated boycotts against Western brands, especially those that support the Zionist state! Mainly, these brands include Nestle, Starbucks, KFC, McDonalds, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Zara, and a diverse variety of other brands. However, was this boycotting movement beneficial?

As the echoes of boycotts reverberate through the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), the impact on international economies is becoming increasingly apparent. The economic battleground, once dominated by global giants, is witnessing the rise of an Arab invisible hand challenging the established order. This silent protest of perceived pro-Israel stances or financial ties to Israel has transcended borders and is reshaping the dynamics of global commerce.

Financial Ripples Across the Globe:

McDonald's, a stalwart symbol of Western fast-food supremacy, grappled with a staggering loss of $6 billion in market value, spotlighting the profound financial repercussions of the boycott movement (CNBC, 2024). Western fast-food giants, including McDonald's, Starbucks, and KFC, find themselves thrust into the forefront of a grassroots boycott surging through Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, and Morocco, transcending specific borders to become a regional wave (Reuters, 2023). Originating in Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, and Morocco, the boycott's influence is now permeating other Arab nations, albeit with limited effects in Saudi Arabia and the UAE (Reuters, 2023). What began as a reaction to perceived support for the Zionist state has transformed into a sweeping roster, encompassing Nestle, Starbucks, KFC, McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Zara, and an array of other prominent brands (Reuters, 2023). Fueled by the influential force of social media, the boycott broadens its reach to include a myriad of companies and products, amplifying its impact across diverse industries (Reuters, 2023). Stirred by a sense of activism, shoppers are heeding the call to shift their loyalty towards local alternatives, reflecting a significant shift in consumer behavior (Reuters, 2023).

Local Impact, Global Implications:

Protests at McDonald's and Starbucks in Jordan show that people are urging to support local brands as part of a social and political movement (Reuters, 2023). In response, McDonald's says they are sad about it, emphasizing that they welcome everyone and promise to help Gaza. Starbucks, on the other hand, claims that they're not taking sides, denying rumors that they support Israel (Reuters, 2023). This is not just about what companies say – it is affecting their sales too. McDonald's in Egypt reports that they are making less money and having a hard time covering their costs (Reuters, 2023). Even the companies that supply Starbucks and McDonald's in Egypt say they're selling about half as much as before, showing how global businesses and local economies are connected (Reuters, 2023). The impact is different in different places. In some countries, like Malaysia, a lot fewer people are going to McDonald's. But in others, the impact is not as clear, like in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Tunisia, where people are not as convinced that boycotting really helps Palestinians (Reuters, 2023). Lebanon, already facing challenges, is dealing with more problems because of the aftermath of bombings and military actions in the region (CNBC, 2024). Surprisingly, as Western brands struggle, Middle Eastern competitors like Starbucks and Coke are actually doing better because of the boycotts (Bloomberg, 2024). It's not just about sales; people are losing jobs because of this movement. Americana for F&B, which includes KFC, Pizza Hut, and Hardees, had to let go of 100 employees (Megaphone, 2024). Even Starbucks in the USA is feeling the negative impact of the boycotts, showing that this movement is making waves beyond the Middle East (Raseef, 2024).

Conclusion:

The MENA boycotts, initially sparked by geopolitical tensions, are proving to be a transformative force, challenging established economic paradigms, and paving the way for a recalibration of global commerce dynamics. As the movement continues to unfold, the true extent of its impact on international economies remains to be seen.

When international brands feel shame to support the Zionist state, when the Arab invisible hand stagnates the international economy, then, indeed the MENA spectates a new liberation from an economic colonialism that has been there for years! In a nutshell: boycotting has worked out!