Unilever

Search: Unilever

(Browse all 1,135 articles)

On the money: "Iconic" brands will help Kraft battle input costs -
CEO

11 February 2011

Kraft Foods chairman and CEO Irene Rosenfeld has insisted that the US food giant's "very, very
strong, iconic brands" and its marketing plans will help the company convince retailers to
increase prices in the face of rising input costs.

Best bits: Egypt adds to investor concerns over emerging markets

7 February 2011

In what was a record week for just-food in the volume of stories published, the political crisis in
Egypt and its impact on the food sector took centre stage.

Editor's choice: the highlights on just-food this week

4 February 2011

Egypt has dominated headlines around the world this week and the political crisis has had an
impact on the food sector, particularly on multinationals operating in the country. Within the
industry, this week saw the start of the world's largest food makers announce their 2010 results -
Hershey, Unilever and Kellogg were among those reporting. And, today (4 February), Benecol
maker Raisio made another push into the UK with the acquisition of cereal and confectionery
maker Big Bear Group.

Quote, unquote: just-food's week in words

4 February 2011

Financial results from the food manufacturers came thick and fast this week, with updates
coming from Kellogg, Unilever and Hershey, among others. Here's the best of what was said this
week.
UPDATE: UK: Unilever's Polk unfazed about commodity pressure

3 February 2011

Unilever will increase its prices at a more "rapid rate" in 2011 as it continues to look to offset
rising commodity costs, concerns over which hit the company's share price today (3 February).

Unilever's FY and Q4 results - what the analysts say

3 February 2011

Unilever today (3 February) booked a jump in annual profits on the back of higher proceeds from
disposals, lower restructuring costs and accelerating underlying sales in the fourth quarter.
Michael Polk, president of Unilever's foods, home and personal care businesses, also noted that
the company had enjoyed its strongest growth in sales volumes for over 30 years. However, this
afternoon, Unilever's shares were down on the London Stock Exchange. Here is a selection of
comments on Unilever's results from key analysts.

UK: Unilever profits up 26% in 2010

3 February 2011

Unilever has posted a 26% jump in annual profits as the consumer goods giant benefited from
lower restructuring costs and proceeds from business disposals - but also from accelerating
underlying sales in the fourth quarter.

US/EGYPT: PepsiCo employees "protecting" Egyptian operations

2 February 2011

The chief executive of PepsiCo has said that local Egyptian employees are protecting its facilities
in the country as local political protests enter their ninth day.

Comment: Sara Lee split fails to dampen takeover talk

2 February 2011

Sara Lee's management no doubt hoped the announcement of plans to split the US food group in
two would give the market some clarity over its future but, writes Dean Best, Wall Street
analysts believe the new-look companies will still be potential takeover targets.

EGYPT: Nestle closes production plants, local HQ

2 February 2011
Nestle has closed its three production plants in Egypt - and its local headquarters in Cairo - due
to the political unrest in the African country.

UPDATE: US: Sara Lee confirms plans to split business

28 January 2011

Sara Lee, the US food group, has this afternoon (28 January) confirmed plans to split itself in
two.

Talking shop: Eyes on Wal-Mart as major health initiative begins

21 January 2011

The news that Wal-Mart Stores is to reformulate thousands of its packaged food products
through the lowering of sodium and sugars has garnered a mix of reactions from industry
watchers, many of whom believe the initiative may now cause a ripple effect throughout the
sector.

UK: Unilever moves Australasia boss to head western Europe

21 January 2011

Unilever has named the head of its operations in south-east Asia and Australasia as president of
its business in western Europe.

US: Wal-Mart unveils major health initiative

20 January 2011

Wal-Mart Stores has announced plans to reformulate thousands of its packaged food products
including slashing sodium by 25% and cutting sugars by 10% by 2015.

UK: Unilever appoints Nevett to head corporate branding

10 January 2011

Unilever has appointed Paul Nevett as global vice president for of the company's brand as part of
efforts to build the manufacturer's corporate reputation.

NETHERLANDS: Unilever appoints VP customer development

6 January 2011

Anglo-Dutch consumer goods giant Unilever has appointed Peter Ernsting as vice president of
customer development for the Netherlands.
The just-food interview - James Lambert, R&R Ice Cream

23 December 2010

The ice cream sector in Europe is dominated by Unilever, the consumer goods giant behind
brands like Wall's, Magnum, Carte d'Or and Ben & Jerry's. However, UK-based R&R Ice Cream
is building a business to be the other major player in the market. In this month's just-food
interview, Dean Best spoke to R&R chief executive James Lambert about the company's
ambitions.

The just-food management briefing - M&A in 2010 - a year in review

20 December 2010

Kraft Foods' move to buy Cadbury in January failed to spark a burst of M&A activity in the food
industry, as economic conditions continued to dampen attitude to risk. As the year progressed,
however, and confidence returned, the pace of acquisitions picked up. But as Dean Best reports,
the nature and rationale behind the deals has altered significantly.

The just-food management briefing - M&A in 2010 - a timeline

20 December 2010

There have been over 640 stories in just-food's M&A section since April this year covering
everything from industry-changing mergers to bolt on acquisitions and brand disposals. This
section to the briefing tracks the major moves through the year by looking at all the deals that
were put under scrutiny in our insights section.

The just-food management briefing - M&A in 2010 - a timeline, part II

20 December 2010

As we headed into September, there was uncertainty about the prospects for M&A activity, with
analysts at KPMG suggesting the value of deals in the food, drink and consumer goods space in
the second quarter stood at just under US$19bn - down from the $49bn of deals recorded in the
first three months of the year. However, the last months of 2010 saw a number of key pieces of
M&A - notably the merger of Greencore and Northern Foods - and deals signed to see PepsiCo
buy Wimm-Bill-Dann and a private-equity consortium by Del Monte Foods.

Sustainability Watch – Karen Hamilton, Unilever

26 November 2010

The launch last week of Unilever’s Sustainable Living Plan sees the Anglo-Dutch food-to-
deodorants group once more setting the pace on corporate sustainability. Ben Cooper spoke with
Karen Hamilton, Unilever’s vice president for sustainability, about the new strategy and how its
ambitious targets set the plan apart from corporate rhetoric.

Quote, unquote: just-food's week in words

26 November 2010

This week had a couple of key interviews this week, with Associated British Foods' finance
director speaking to just-food about commodity costs and restructuring in the group's grocery
division, while we spoke to Gu founder James Averdieck about what the company has been
doing since its sale to Noble Foods earlier this year. Meanwhile Ireland announced a series of
austerity measures in the country which look set to impact the retail sector and Campbell Soup
Co continued to post disappointing results. Here's the best of what was said this week:

Editor's choice: the highlights on just-food this week

26 November 2010

As Ireland's economic crisis dominated the business pages, data on the country's grocery retail
sector suggested it was returning to growth after months in the doldrums. However, will Dublin's
IMF-backed austerity package stall that growth? Elsewhere, management at Del Monte Foods
said yes to a US$5.3bn private-equity takeover, Danone snapped up US yoghurt-maker YoCream
International and Campbell Soup Co. and Hormel Foods revealed differing fortunes to the
market.

UK: Northern Foods chief Barden to join Brakes

24 November 2010

The chief executive of Northern Foods has stepped down to take up a senior role at foodservice
supplier Brakes Group, just a week after Northern announced plans to merge with Irish ready-
meals supplier Greencore.

Quote, unquote: just-food's week in words

19 November 2010

The merger between Greencore and Northern Foods, the race to own Yoplait, reform of Europe's
farm policy and Unilever's new push on sustainability all got people talking this week. Here is
the best of who said what.

Editor's choice: the highlights on just-food this week

19 November 2010
In the week that just-food kicked off its Open House period, the food sector saw a merger with
implications on both sides of the Atlantic with the deal between Greencore and Northern Foods.
In the US, Heinz, JM Smucker and Wal-Mart Stores reported their latest numbers to Wall Street.
And, in Europe, the battle for yoghurt brand Yoplait intensified when Lactalis tabled a
EUR1.4bn (US$1.91bn) - that was swiftly rejected - while the EU launched plans to reform farm
policy.

BELGIUM: Consumer watchdog hits out at "complex" food labels

19 November 2010

The head of Europe's leading consumer watchdog has said mandatory EU labelling information
has become so complex and detailed even she cannot understand it.

UK: OFT closes probe into supermarket "price fixing"

18 November 2010

The UK's Office of Fair Trading has dropped its investigation into allegations of price fixing
between the country's biggest supermarket chains and consumer goods firms.

UK: Unilever to increase prices

17 November 2010

Knorr soups-maker Unilever said it will increase prices on some of its products in a bid to recoup
higher commodity costs.

UPDATE: UK: Unilever urges shareholders to back sustainability plan

15 November 2010

Unilever said it needs to attract "the right investors" as it today (15 November) set out plans to
halve the environmental footprint of its products.

One is a lonely number, unless you're Unilever. A top maker of packaged consumer goods worldwide,
Unilever products are sold in more than 170 countries throughout Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle
East, North America, and Western Europe. The company's offerings span several categories, including
savory, dressings, and spreads; ice cream and beverages; personal care; and home care. Unilever's vast
portfolio includes 11 brands that ring up more than $1 billion each annually. The best sellers include
Hellmann's (mayonnaise), Knorr (soups), Lipton (tea), Dove and Lux (soaps), and Sure and Degree
(antiperspirants). Unilever is the operating arm of Netherlands-based Unilever N.V. and UK-based
Unilever PLC.

Contact Information
Address: Unilever House, 100 Victoria Embankment
London EC4Y 0YD, United Kingdom
Phone: +44-20-7822-5252 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +44-20-7822-
5252 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Fax: +44-20-7822-5951

Financial Highlights
Fiscal Year End: December
Revenue (2009): 57074.30 M
Revenue Growth (1 yr): (-0.10%)
Employees (2009): 163,000
Employee Growth (1 yr): (-6.30%)

Key People

• Chairman: Michael Treschow

• CEO and Director: Paul Polman
• Media Relations, Unilever Dominican Republic: Martha Hidalgo

Industry Information

Sector: Consumer Goods

Industry: Food - Major Diversified

Top Competitors

• Kraft Foods Inc. (kft)

• Nestl� S.A. (nsrgy.pk)
• The Procter & Gamble Company (pg)

Unilever is a British-Dutch multinational corporation that owns many of the world's consumer
product brands in foods, beverages, cleaning agents and personal care products.

Unilever is a dual-listed company consisting of Unilever N.V. in Rotterdam, The Netherlands

and Unilever PLC in London, United Kingdom. This arrangement is similar to those of Reed
Elsevier and Royal Dutch Shell prior to their unified structures. Both Unilever companies have
the same directors and effectively operate as a single business. The current non-executive
Chairman of Unilever N.V. and PLC is Michael Treschow while Paul Polman is Group Chief
Executive.

Unilever's main international competitors include Nestlé and Procter & Gamble. They also face
competition in local markets or product ranges from companies such as ConAgra, Danone,
General Mills, Henkel, Kraft Foods, Mars, Inc., Pepsico, Reckitt Benckiser, Sara Lee and S. C.
Johnson & Son.
Contents
[hide]

• 1 History
• 2 Products
• 3 Advertising
• 4 Corporate governance
• 5 Corporate image
o 5.1 Environmental issues
o 5.2 Social issues
• 6 See also
• 7 References

• 8 External links

[edit] History

Unilever was created in 1930 by the amalgamation of the operations of British soapmaker Lever
Brothers and Dutch margarine producer Margarine Unie, a merger as palm oil was a major raw
material for both margarines and soaps and could be imported more efficiently in larger
quantities.

In the 1930s the Unilever business grew and new ventures were launched in Latin America. In
1972 Unilever purchased A&W Restaurants' Canadian division but sold its shares through a
management buyout to former A&W Food Services of Canada CEO Jefferson J. Mooney in July
1996.[3] By 1980 soap and edible fats contributed just 40% of profits, compared with an original
90%. In 1984 the company bought the brand Brooke Bond (maker of PG Tips tea).

In 1987 Unilever strengthened its position in the world skin care market by acquiring
Chesebrough-Ponds, the maker of Ragú, Pond's, Aqua-Net, Cutex Nail Polish, and Vaseline. In
1989 Unilever bought Calvin Klein Cosmetics, Fabergé, and Elizabeth Arden, but the latter was
later sold (in 2000) to FFI Fragrances.[4]

In 1996 Unilever purchased Helene Curtis Industries, giving the company "a powerful new
presence in the United States shampoo and deodorant market".[4] The purchase brought Unilever
the Suave and Finesse hair-care product brands and Degree deodorant brand.[5]
Global employment at Unilever 2000-2008
Black represents employment numbers in Europe, light grey represents the
Americas and dark grey represents Asia, Africa, and Middle East. Between 2000 and
2008 Unilever reduced global workforce numbers by 41%, from 295,000 to 174,000.
Note: Europe figures for 2000-2003 are all Europe; from 2004 figures in black are
Western Europe. For 2004-2008 Figures for Asia, Africa and Middle East include
Eastern and Central Europe.
Source: Unilever Annual Reports 2004, 2008

In 2000 the company absorbed the American business Best Foods, strengthening its presence in
North America and extending its portfolio of foods brands. In April 2000 it bought both Ben &
Jerry's and Slim Fast.

The company is multinational with operating companies and factories on every continent (except
Antarctica) and research laboratories at Colworth and Port Sunlight in England; Vlaardingen in
the Netherlands; Trumbull, Connecticut, and Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey in the United States;
Bangalore in India (see also Hindustan Unilever Limited); and Shanghai in China.

The US division carried the Lever Brothers name until the 1990s, when it adopted that of the
parent company. The American unit has headquarters in New Jersey, and no longer maintains a
presence at Lever House, the iconic skyscraper on Park Avenue in New York City.
Unilever's Lipton brand

The company is said to promote sustainability[6] and started a sustainable agriculture programme
in 1998.[7] In May 2007 it became the first tea company to commit to sourcing all its tea in a
sustainable manner,[8] employing the Rainforest Alliance, an international environmental NGO,
to certify its tea estates in East Africa, as well as third-party suppliers in Africa and other parts of
the world.[9] It declared its aim to have all Lipton Yellow Label and PG Tips tea bags sold in
Western Europe certified by 2010, followed by all Lipton tea bags globally by 2015.[10]

Covalence, an ethical reputation ranking agency, placed Unilever at the top of its ranking based
on positive versus negative news coverage for 2007.[11]

In 2008 Unilever was honoured at the 59th Annual Technology & Engineering Emmy Awards
for "Outstanding Achievement in Advanced Media Technology for Creation and Distribution of
Interactive Commercial Advertising Delivered Through Digital Set Top Boxes" for its program
Axe: Boost Your ESP.[12]

On August 9, 2010, Unilever signed an asset purchase agreement with the Norwegian dairy
group TINE, to acquire the activities of Diplom-Is in Denmark, as of 30 September 2010.

On September 24, 2010, Unilever announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to
sell its consumer tomato products business in Brazil to Cargill

On September 27, 2010, Unilever purchased Alberto-Culver, the maker of personal care and
household products such as VO5, Nexxus, TRESemmé, and Mrs. Dash for $US3.7 billion.[13]

On September 28, 2010, Unilever and EVGA announced that they have signed an agreement
under which Unilever will acquire EVGA’s ice cream brands (amongst others, Scandal, Variete
and Karabola) and distribution network in Greece, for an undisclosed amount.

[edit] Products
For a full list of billion dollar brands, see List of Unilever brands.

Unilever owns more than 400 brands as a result of acquisitions, however, the company focuses
on what are called the "billion-dollar brands", 13 brands, each of which achieve annual sales in
excess of €1 billion. Unilever's top 25 brands account for more than 70% of sales.[14] The brands
fall almost entirely into two categories: Food and Beverages, and Home and Personal Care.

Unilever's brands include:

• Aviance • Lipton
• Axe/Lynx • Lux (soap)
• Blue Band[15] • Omo/Surf (detergent)
• Dove • Rexona/Sure
• Flora/Becel • Sunsilk
• Heartbrand
 • Hellmann's
• TIGI (haircare)[16][17]
• Knorr

[edit] Advertising

A freezer in Queens, NY filled with Strauss ice cream from Israel with the Heartbrand

Unilever has produced many advertising campaigns, including:

• Lynx/Axe click advert with Nick Lachey (US only) and Ben Affleck (Non-US
only)
• PG Tips Monkey and Al
• Knorr Chicken Tonight, 'I feel like chicken tonight'
• Flora London Marathon
• Knorr global brand
• Dove Campaign for Real Beauty, including Evolution
• Calve Pindakaas (peanut butter) in the Netherlands
• Comfort Pure recommended by mothercare
• Clear Anti-Dandruff shampoo and conditioner with the entertainer Rain
• Clear Anti-Dandruff shampoo and conditioner with the entertainer Nicole
Scherzinger
• Clear Soft and Shiny shampoo and conditioner with the actress Sandra Dewi

[edit] Corporate governance

Unilever's highest executive body is called the Unilever Executive which is led by the Group
Chief Executive (Paul Polman). It is responsible for delivering profit and growth across the
company.

Members of the Unilever Executive include: Executive and non-executive directors at

Unilever are:
• Paul Polman (Group Chief
Executive) • Michael Treschow
• Jean-Marc Huet (Chief Financial • Professor Geneviève Berger
Officer) • The Rt. Hon. The Lord Brittan of
• Michael B. Polk(President Global Spennithorne, QC
 Foods, Home & Personal Care) • Wim Dik
• Professor Geneviève Berger (Chief • Charles E. Golden
Research & Development Officer) • Kees J. Storm
• Doug Baillie (President Western • Jeroen van der Veer
Europe) • Byron E. Grote
• Harish Manwani (President • Hixonia Nyasulu
Asia,Africa, Central & Eastern • N. R. Narayana Murthy
Europe) • Lord Simon of Highbury CBE
• Dave Lewis (President Americas)
• Sandy Ogg (Chief HR Officer) • Sunil Bharti Mittal
• Pier Luigi Sigismondi (Chief Supply
Chain Officer)

• Keith Weed (Chief Marketing and

Communication Officer)

[edit] Corporate image

Unilever claims that corporate social responsibility is at the heart of its business.[18] However, the
transition to a responsible and sustainable company is ongoing and Unilever has attracted a
variety of criticisms from political, environmental and human rights activists on not achieving
the high aims it communicates on a number of topics.[19]

[edit] Environmental issues

This section may contain wording that merely promotes the subject
without imparting verifiable information. Please remove or replace such
wording, unless you can cite independent sources that support the
characterization.

Phosphate

Unilever is still using Phosphate [20] in the products like OMO & SKIP in South America
sometimes overpassing the law and competing with all the local brands which are Phosphate
free.

Palm oil

Unilever has been criticised by Greenpeace for causing deforestation,[21] Unilever was targeted in
2008 by Greenpeace UK,[22] which criticised the company for buying palm oil from suppliers that
are damaging Indonesia's rainforests. Unilever, as a founding member of the Roundtable on
Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), responded by publicizing its plan to obtain its palm oil from
sources that are certified as sustainable by 2015.[23]

In Côte d'Ivoire, one of Unilever's palm oil suppliers was accused of clearing forest for
plantations, an activity that threatens a primate species, Miss Waldron's Red Colobus. Unilever
intervened to halt the clearances pending the results of an environmental assessment.[24]
On 4 July 2010, Unilever announced that it has secured enough GreenPalm certificates of
sustainable palm oil to cover the requirements of its European, Australia, and New Zealand
business.[citation needed] GreenPalm is a certificate trading programme, endorsed by the RSPO, which
is designed to tackle the environmental and social problems created by the production of palm
oil.

Rainforest Alliance

Unilever has committed to purchase all its tea from sustainable, ethical sources.[citation needed] It has
asked the international environmental NGO, Rainforest Alliance, to start by certifying tea farms
in Africa.

Lipton and PG Tips will be the first brands to contain certified tea. The company aims to have all
Lipton Yellow Label and PG Tips tea bags sold in Western Europe certified by 2010 and all
Lipton tea bags sold globally by 2015.

Animal testing

Unilever states it is committed to the elimination of animal testing, and where it is a legal
requirement in some countries, it tries to convince the local authorities to change the law.[25]
Some activists[who?] argue that this is little more than an effort to gain good publicity and Unilever
continue to use animal experimentation such as the LD50 poisoning test.

[edit] Social issues

Race and advertisements

Hindustan Unilever, had been showing television advertisements for skin-lightening cream, Fair
and Lovely, depicting depressed, dark-skinned women, who had been ignored by employers and
men, suddenly finding new boyfriends and glamorous careers after the cream had lightened their
skin.[26]

The Austrian branch of Unilever (Eskimo) is producing and marketing an ice-cream under the
name Mohr im Hemd. "Mohr" (moor), is a colonial German word for African or black people,
has a heavily colonialist and racist connotation.,[27][28] "Mohr im Hemd" (moor in the shirt) is a
traditional Austrian chocolate speciality which refers to naked, "wild" Africans. Unilever refutes
any racist intentions and claims that it has tested the name in broad market studies in Austria
without any critical feedback.

Sexism in advertisements
The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood criticized Unilever for the 2007 Axe marketing
campaign, which they considered sexist.[29] Unilever's response is that the Axe campaign is
intended as a spoof and "not meant to be taken literally".[30]

Unilever has launched the Dove "Real Beauty" marketing campaign, which encouraged women
to reject the underfed and hyper-sexualized images of modern advertising in 2007.[31]
Child labour
In 2003 Hindustan Unilever was accused of making use of child labour,[32] among others.

[edit] See also

London portal

Netherlands
portal

Companies
portal

• Morris Tabaksblat, a previous CEO

• Gorton's of Gloucester, a former subsidiary
• Palm Line, a former shipping company
• Unilever Australasia

[edit] References

1. ^ a b c Annual Report 2009

2. ^ Unilever: About us
3. ^ Chronolgy of A&W Root Beer Canada
4. ^ a b New York Times, February 15, 1996 "Unilever Agrees to Buy Helene
Curtis".
5. ^ Id.
6. ^ Ethical Corporation article
7. ^ Unilever's sustainable agriculture programme
8. ^ San Diego Times
9. ^ Unilver: Sustainable Tea
10.^ Unilever press release
11.^ Covalence Ethical Ranking 2007 Press Release, 2 January 2008
12.^ 59th Annual Technology & Engineering Emmy Awards
13.^ http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-09-27/unilever-to-purchase-
alberto-culver-for-3-7-billion.html
14.^ 2008 Annual Report and Accounts pp.2-3.
15.^ "Blue Band, Rama".
http://www.unilever.com/brands/foodbrands/blueband_rama_countrycrock_do
riana/index.aspx.
16.^ "Unilever Completes TIGI Acquisition". GCI magazine. April 14, 2009.
http://www.gcimagazine.com/business/suppliers/acquisitions/42958262.html.
17.^ "TIGI consumer site". http://www.tigihaircare.com/consumer/en-NZ/home/.
18.^ "Beyond Corporate Responsibility:Social innovation and sustainable
development as drivers of business growth". Unilever.
http://www.unilever.com/images/Beyond%20Corporate%20Responsibilty%20-
 %20Social%20innovation%20and%20sustainable%20development%20as
%20drivers%20of%20business%20growth_tcm13-95521.pdf. Retrieved 2010-
06-20.
19.^ "Unilever Corporate Crimes". Corporate Watch.
http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=260#cheapresources. Retrieved
2007-08-02.
20.^ "Unilever-Chile REDUCIRA el uso de los fosfatos". Ultimahora.
http://www.ultimahora.com/notas/282074-Unilever-Chile-reducira-el-uso-de-
los-fosfatos. Retrieved 2010-09-30.
21.^ "Unilever admits toxic dumping: will clean up but not come clean".
Greenpeace. http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/contentlookup.cfm?
CFID=6864301&CFTOKEN=96874361&ucidparam=20010620124942&MenuP
oint=G-A. Retrieved 2007-08-02.
22.^ "Ape protest at Unilever factory". BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7358071.stm. Retrieved 2008-03-23.
23.^ "Unilever has announced its intention to have all of its palm oil certified
sustainable by 2015".
http://www.unilever.com.au/ourcompany/newsandmedia/pressreleases/Sustai
nable-palm-oil.asp. Retrieved 2008-05-01.
24.^ "Manifesto for the Conservation of the Tanoé Swamps Forest".
http://www.manifeste-fmt.org/updates.php. Retrieved 2008-07-19.
25.^ "Developing Alternative Approaches To Animal Testing".
http://www.unilever.com/sustainability/consumer/testing/. Retrieved 2010-08-
05.
26.^ Dhillon, Amrit (2007-07-01). "India's hue and cry over paler skin". The Daily
Telegraph (London). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2007/07/01/wskin101.xml. Retrieved 2010-05-26.
27.^ Der Standard: "I will mohr!: Werberat prüft"
28.^ FM4: "Will i mohr?"
29.^ Ax the Axe Campaign
30.^ Unilever Shuns Stereotypes of Women (Unless Talking to Men) - New York
Times
31.^ Unilever Disrobed: Interview With Dove/Axe Mashup Artist
32.^ "Monsanto, Unilever use Child Labour in India". India Committee of the
Netherlands.
http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/agbiotech/2003/monsantounilever.html.
Retrieved 2007-08-02.

[edit] External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related
to: Unilever

• Official website
• Sustainable Living Plan
• Foodservice website
• Lady Lever Art Gallery
 [show]v · d ·
eUnilever

[show]v · d · eAEX companies of the

Netherlands

[show]v · d · e FTSE 100 companies of the

United Kingdom

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilever"

Categories: Companies listed on the London Stock Exchange | Companies listed on

the New York Stock Exchange | Multinational companies | Companies established in
1930 | Unilever | Companies based in London | Multinational food companies |
Dental companies | Dual-listed companies | Manufacturing companies of the
Netherlands | Multinational companies headquartered in the Netherlands | Food
manufacturers of the United Kingdom | Household and personal product companies
of the United Kingdom | Organisations based in the City of London

Hidden categories: Articles with unsourced statements from August 2010 | All
articles with unsourced statements | Articles with peacock terms from August 2010 |
All articles with peacock terms | All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded
phrases | Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from August
2010

Personal tools

• Log in / create account

Namespaces

• Article
• Discussion

Variants
Views

• Read
• Edit
• View history

Actions

Search

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article
• Donate to Wikipedia

Interaction

• Help
• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia

Toolbox

• What links here

• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Permanent link
• Cite this page

Print/export

• Create a book
• Download as PDF
• Printable version

Languages

• ‫العربية‬
• Български
• Català
• Česky
• Dansk
• Deutsch
• Español
• Français
• ગુજરાતી
• Bahasa Indonesia
• Italiano
• ‫עברית‬
• Basa Jawa
• ಕನನಡ
• Magyar
• Nederlands
• 日本語
• Norsk (bokmål)
• Piemontèis
• Polski
• Português
• Română
• Русский
• Suomi
• Svenska
• Türkçe
• Tiếng Việt
• 中文

• This page was last modified on 13 FebrThe Unilever - SWOT Analysis

company profile is the essential source for top-level company data and
information. Unilever - SWOT Analysis examines the company’s key business
structure and operations, history and products, and provides summary
analysis of its key revenue lines and strategy.

Unilever is one of the world's leading fast moving consumer goods

companies. It offers products across foods, home and personal care
categories. Unilever sells in over 150 countries and manufactures in more
than 70 countries. Its products are used by consumers 150 million times per
day. The group operates in Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa. It is
headquartered in London, the UK, and employed 174,000 people as of
December 2008. The group recorded revenues of E40,523 million ($59,623.1
million) during fiscal year ended December 2008 (FY2008), an increase of
0.8% over FY2007. The operating profit of the group was E7,167 million
($10,545.1 million) during FY2008, an increase of 36.6% over FY2007. The
net profit was E5,285 million ($7,776 million) in FY2008, an increase of 27.8%
over FY2007.

Scope of the Report

- Provides all the crucial information on Unilever required for business and
competitor intelligence needs
- Contains a study of the major internal and external factors affecting
 Unilever in the form of a SWOT analysis as well as a breakdown and
examination of leading product revenue streams of Unilever
-Data is supplemented with details on Unilever history, key executives,
business description, locations and subsidiaries as well as a list of products
and services and the latest available statement from Unilever

Reasons to Purchase

- Support sales activities by understanding your customers’ businesses better

- Qualify prospective partners and suppliers
- Keep fully up to date on your competitors’ business structure, strategy and
prospects
- Obtain the most up to date company information available

Customers who bought this item also bought

Unilever

Kraft Foods, Inc. - SWOT Analysis

Hindustan Unilever Limited - SWOT Analysis

Glanbia plc - SWOT Analysis

Arla Foods amba - SWOT Analysis

Volkswagen AG - SWOT Analysis

Nestlé SA

Saudi Telecom Company - SWOT Analysis

Alcon, Inc. - SWOT Analysis

Atlas Copco AB - SWOT Analysis

•
• uary 2011 at 22:49.

Product innovations

We use our knowledge and imagination to translate science into products that meet
a range of consumer needs. In this section you can find examples of this work.

Woman’s bare back

Skin lotion: delivering moisture where it’s needed

The secret of taking care of your skin lies in getting moisture to all its layers – and
keeping it there.

Using Cif Power Dream on a hob

Shielding against stains

Every so often great innovations are discovered more by chance than by design.
The development of Cif Shield Technology started with just such an accidental
observation: one that unlocked the secret to superior cleaning.

Woman washing

Clean clothes, less water

Rinsing clothes is the most water- and time-consuming part of hand washing. How
are we helping?

Young woman against sky, portrait, view from below

Smoother, straighter hair

There’s a good reason why Sunsilk is the number one hair care brand in Asia, Latin
American and the Middle East, and the fastest-growing in Europe - tip-targeting
technology.

A man in a yellow jersey carrying a bike

Intelligent deodorant

Our Rexona deodorant uses body-responsive micro-capsule technology that kicks in

when it’s needed most, giving people the confidence to face the day's more
stressful situations.

A family enjoying ice cream

Cool ice cream innovations

Unilever has found a way to make ice cream healthier as well as really tasty. It has
all been possible thanks to a new ice cream ingredient discovered by Unilever's ice
cream scientists.

Knorr stockpot used in making soup

Knorr: a revolution in stock

Knorr helps home-cooks provide natural and nutritious meals for their families in a
convenient way. This story describes the transformation of one of Knorr’s iconic
products: the bouillon cube becomes the Stock Pot.

Magnum icecream

Pioneering technology for Magnum Temptation

Since its launch in Europe in the early 90s, Magnum has grown to be one of
Unilever’s biggest brands, bringing real chocolate indulgenI think we’ve all seen the
Dove Campaign for Real Beauty or the Dove Self Esteem Fund. This seems like an
honourable cause, and for a while I was pleased to see a change in attitude being
led by a big company! Finally!

Then I learned more about Dove, their campaign, and their parent company, and
now I find myself boycotting Dove (among other products), and listing for you some
of the many reasons why.

First I’d like to acknowledge a few things that may occur to readers.

1)Dove is a company, (owned in turn by a larger company called Unilever) as such,

its sole practical purpose is to make money through the mass production and
marketing of a product. However when a company chooses to market itself in a
morally self-righteous way that, like the Campaign for Real Beauty, criticises its own
industry and attempts to change society’s values and attitudes , they become
responsible for the contents of their advertising and their cause. Suddenly it’s not
just an ad any more, it’s a moral instruction, trying to help a cause and change the
way we think. This leaves it open to analysis, criticism and pressure to “do it right”
more than an ad that just says “buy my deodorant”.
2)I understand that to boycott Lipton Tea because it’s owned by the same company
as Dove is a bit indirect but I consider it to be like vegetarianism. Other people can
buy Unilever products, I’m fine with that, if I can get someone to think about this
issue in a way they haven’t before, then I’ll be really happy, let alone if someone
decides to stop supporting Unilever. It’s a personal choice I have decided to make
because I’m not comfortable with giving this company my money – not because I
think that if I stop buying Rexona deodorant the whole company’s going to go
broke.

3)There are other issues with Unilever, some I may go into briefly, but many are not
relevant to my argument. There are issues with outsourcing labour, animal testing,
and products marketed in countries such as India and Malaysia which are
considered racist (search Fair & Lovely on youtube, you will be amazed). I will be
focusing on issues relating to Unilever’s hypocritical sexism, as well as a handful of
issues I have with the advertising campaigns for both Dove and Lynx (both Unilever
products).

I’ll start with Dove. Their aim (apart from selling their product) is to “make women
feel beautiful every day by widening the definition of beauty and inspiring them to
take great care of themselves”. Ok, sounds good (maybe apart from the “inspiring
them to take great care of themselves” part which to me sounds like “wash with
dove soap”) but why don’t we take a closer look. Dove aims to “widen the definition
of beauty” – so rather than “beautiful” meaning a tall, blonde, thin model with big
boobs, Dove encourage us to consider other women as being beautiful too – they
use images of larger women, older women, freckly women, darker women, etc in
their advertisements. This is in itself an admirable task, but is it really feminist?
Dove still places value on beauty – being beautiful is the aim of this campaign, even
if beauty has been redefined, it is still something we are expected to strive towards.
In an effort to tackle the self-esteem issues of teenage girls, Dove suggests we “Tell
her she’s beautiful”. Why not “tell her she’s intelligent”, “tell her she’s kind”, “tell
her she’s valuable”, “tell her she’s loved”. Granted, Dove is only a beauty company,
but as mentioned before, by tackling this issue of female self-esteem, they must
either do it right or not do it at all. If beauty is the only thing we have to strive for,
where does this leave women who don’t fit in to Dove’s expanded definition of
beauty? There are no images of morbidly obese women in Dove campaigns, no
burns victims, no amputees, no albinos, no dwarves... yes I’m taking it a bit far
here, but only in an effort to demonstrate that Dove’s broadened definition of
beauty can serve to further marginalise those who don’t fit in to it. Not only has
patriarchal society deemed them ugly, but even Dove has conveniently ignored
them. The message that Dove fails to send to women is that beauty isn’t
everything, and there is no reason why women can’t be valuable, visible members
of society if they’re ugly. Not everyone’s beautiful, but everyone’s valuable.

Even if you don’t agree with these points, there is one thing you may agree with me
on, once you have read on. The Dove Campaign for Real Beauty is completely null
and void, absolutely hypocritical and ineffective when we take into account the fact
that its fellow Unilever company Lynx (or Axe in the US) circulates (clever)
advertising like this:

- A campaign where censored images of lingerie models are printed, the missing
pieces only available to those who text a number after 9pm and receive and MMS
with the missing bits. Also billboards which light up at night to reveal the models’
bodies: http://www.barryhand.ie/blog/axe-day-night-sms-engagement/

- A casting competition for Australia’s hottest groupies to use in the next Lynx
campaign: http://lynxeffect.com.au/casting/

- A cheeky and creative game, the aim of which is to get with a hot lingerie model
(she gets bored so easily that the player has to keep “twisting” or changing his
personality, occupation, interests etc to keep her interested and eventually “get
with” her [use your imagination]) This in itself is sending a questionable message to
teenage boys: Hot girls are lingerie models. Girls won’t like you for who you are,
keep them interested by changing your personality. Hmm...:
http://lynxeffect.com.au/keepingkeeley/

May I be the first to say – sorry what are we buying here? Are we buying deodorant
or porn? Shower gel or prostitutes? I am mighty confused.
What confuses me even more than how and why these images are even allowed
into the mass media. No matter how clever or funny they may be, they not only
objectify women (we can’t really argue this because it’s what they are intended to
do) but they NORMALISE the objectification of women – so because these images
surround us in all types of media and in many forms, we accept them as being
normal representations of women – physically, sexually and behaviourally. This is
not ok. I don’t want to one day raise a son who is conditioned by this advertising to
think that success is not one but two groupies in bikinis spraying him with
deodorant, body spray and shower gel (advertised as a “threesome”) and I do not
want to raise a daughter who thinks that her body is her passport to success, love
and value.

There are a number of things wrong with Lynx’s advertising campaigns. Sexism is
just one of them. These ads serve to destroy the self esteem of both boys and girls –
so how can both Dove and Lynx be owned by the same company? Their aims seem
to be majorly conflicting – while Dove apparently pours money into helping all girls
think they’re beautiful no matter what, Lynx appears to be helping them think that
boys are only interested in girls who emulate the Page 3 girls and soft porn models
featured in their successful campaigns.

I would probably not boycott Unilever if Lynx advertisements were not so

outrageously pornographic. I probably wouldn’t bother to stop buying my Lipton
Chai Lattes if Dove’s campaigns were not so disgustingly self-righteous. Both of
these companies produce products which often have nothing to do with the images
they circulate. It is the unbelievably extreme contrast between these two brands
that has shocked me into my refusal to give them any more of my money. Once my
last can of impulse is gone, that’s it for Unilever – no more Dove, Impulse or Chicken
Tonight.
I’m not trying to convince you to boycott them too, (though it’d be fab if you would!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=113130068040&ref=mf ) perhaps you’d
rather just roll your eyes every time you see a Dove ad, or complain when you see a
“Lynx Mynx” at your local Westfield shopping centre (her task is to date as many
men as possible and pick the best one), either way, I’m thankful I’ve been lucky
enough to have the opportunity to share with you something you may not have
known about before.ce to the adult ice cream market.

THE STRATEGIC RENEWAL

Renewal of strategy-making can set a benevolent circle going. But Silver argues that none of the
well-known strategic frameworks will do the trick, whether you fancy the Boston matrix, PIMS
(Profit Impact of Market Strategy), Michael Porter's 'five forces' and 'three generic strategies',
core competencies, 'parenting' or the 'three value disciplines'. In his view, none of these provides
a satisfactory answer to seven critical tests of strategic robustness. How does your own strategy
(if any) match the criteria?

• Does it reflect the business realities of the new century?

• Does it begin with the customer?
• Is it rooted and imbued with market understanding?
• Is it practical (not theoretical)?
• Is it specific (not superficial)?
• Does it encourage a longer-term view?
• Is it measurable?

To those seven we would add a most important eighth criterion. Does it embrace the present and
future potential of information, and especially Internet technology? That is indispensable in
implementing the seven: portraying reality, connecting with customers, interpreting markets,
achieving specific and practical results, envisioning the future and applying measurements in real
time. The new IT adds a dimension all its own: creating a new business system, uniting the
business, the suppliers and the customers in a new and vibrant marketplace.

New is the key word. For some of the strategic schools examined by Silver, sheer old age
explains the fading of the message. The Boston matrix is especially hoary. It divided operations
into stars (for backing), cows (for milking), question marks (for possible stardom) and dogs (for
killing) according to their market share and market growth. As Silver points out, that says
nothing whatsoever about strategy. It's a guide to investment, not to creating a better business.
Even as an investment guide, it's fallible, because of self-fulfilling prophecy. Dogs and cows get
treated like dogs or cows, and that's the end of that - and them.

The book gives its highest rating to the 'three value disciplines' promoted by Michael Treacy and
Fred Wiersema. Their theory attributes market leadership to a choice between operational
excellence, product leadership or customer intimacy. This thesis, though, offends against the
principle that you have to do everything. You get nowhere with operational excellence which
results in products that don't lead the market or rejoice the customer. Since none of the three can
stand on its own, the model falls down.

All seven strategic models, anyway, share the same weakness. IT is ancillary at best in the
thought of their proponents. Yet embracing the new technology and using it to revolutionise the
business model is as important as what Silver isolates as the key factors in 'committment':

1. Developing an understanding of and immersion in the market with customers.

2. Establishing a long-term horizon and determination to win out, overcoming the inevitable
undertainties of any late 1990s market.

Silver adds that one of these two elements without the other won't work: they 'go hand-in-hand;
identifying future goals and opportunities must be born out of totally rigorous, deep-rooted
market immersion'. His example is Microsoft, which was heading into possible oblivion with a
strategy that ignored the Internet. Bill Gates turned the company on a dime, switching R&D
spending dramatically, forming key alliances, buying Net start-ups and striving to drive Netscape
out of the browser market (with tactics to which US anti-trust regulators and the courts took great
exception).

Microsoft has always been fond of that form of commitment which, in the words of Brian
Arthur, a Stanford professor, 'discourages competitors from taking on a potentially dominant
rival'. One traditional weapon to this end is price. British Airways, for example, was accused of
'predatory pricing' when its tactics helped to drive Laker Airways out of business. In Silver's
lexicon, though, pricing strategy is not just about 'low price'. In some cases, price-
competitiveness may well be fundamental. In other cases, there are other key ingredients: value
for money, quality and service.

That observation leads straight back to the all-or-nothing principle: 'all three forms of potential
advantage need to work harmoniously together to provide and sustain...lasting and successful
market position'. That position is also dependent on what the book calls 'emotion'. A power
brand harnesses people's powerful feelings - whether they are buying shirts or Intel
microprocessors.

THE TEST OF PERFORMANCE

Intel's devices have usually passed Silver's test of performance, whose 'core is about the basic
functionality and reliability of a product - does it do the job it's supposed to do well and better
than its rivals?'. This is far easier said than done in most industries these days. All products climb
towards the same standards, and those that don't reach the top tend to drop off the tree. By
approaching the market in innovative ways - the 'changing the rules' approach - companies can
keep ahead of the game. But performance won't win unaided.

The crucial aid is service, which 'is no longer enough' without 'Hustle', defined by Silver as
'going beyond customers' expectations and creating levels of service that had not been imagined'.
In case that sounds too vague, it's spelt out. The Hustle service is...

• Comprehensive ('Whatever I want')

• Available ('Wherever, whenever I want it')
• Personalised ('Tailored just for me')
• Symbiotic (provided in a context of an enduring, mutually beneficial relationship)

As Book Six shows, all five of these aims are far more easily achieved by the use of IT - indeed,
their realisation is often only possible because of IT. People who see IP technology as the
platform for growth are indispensable members of what Warren Bennis, writing with Patricia
Ward Biederman, calls a 'Great Group'. Their book, Organising Genius, argues that Great Groups
have replaced great men as the driving forces for organisational breakthroughs. The authors'
recipe is...

1. Gather the ablest people you can find to lead the revolution
2. Place them under a highly effective leader
3. Continue to recruit talent as a key activity
4. Form and share a powerful vision and mission
5. Set up a separate revolutionary HQ
6. Focus revolution on a chosen opponent: 'The Enemy'
7. Pick the right person for every job
8. Leave creative people free to create
9. Insist on delivery against objectives

Intel's domination of micro-circuitry exemplifies all nine steps. It tackles recruitment so seriously
that half-a-dozen people may interview a single candidate intensively. One interviewer even
refused to take a call from Robert Noyce, the chairman of the board, because 'I have a candidate.'
As Silver's Market Commitment Model recognises, strategy revolves around people and their
enlistment in the cause.

People-based strategy uses IT as platform and cement for the nine-step regime . The steps create
exactly what Riding the Revolution requires: a group of dedicated, optimistic people who believe
that they can accomplish anything; who won't rest on their achievements; and who see strategy,
animated by its powers of information and communication, as a living, breathing force.

Massacre in Maguindanao

Warlords, Clan Wars and

Capitalist Rule in Philippines
 Philippine police amid bodies dug up from massacre in Maguindanao province, November 23.
(Photo: Rolex Dela Pena/European Pressphoto Agency)

Down with Martial Law – U.S. Forces Get Out – Defend the Bangsamoro!
For a Trotskyist Party to Fight for Workers Revolution!
(Pilipino) Warlord, Clan Wars at Kapitalistang Paghahari sa Pilipinas (Disyembre 2009)

MANILA/NEW YORK, December 20 – On November 23, some 57 people including women and journalists were
massacred in Barangay Saniag, in the province of Maguindanao on the southern Philippines island of Mindanao.
Among those killed were the wife of the deputy mayor of Buluan, Esmael (Toto) Mangudadatu, as well as several
other female relatives. Supporters and companions of the Mangudadatus were on their way to the Commission on
Elections (Comelec) office to file a Certificate of Candidacy for the deputy mayor to run for provincial governor.
Also among the victims were 18 journalists who were accompanying them. At around 10:30 a.m., they were blocked
at a checkpoint manned by some 100 Maguindanao police and armed civilians allegedly led by Datu Andal
Ampatuan Jr., the mayor of Datu Unsay town and son of Maguindanao’s present governor, Ampal Ampatuan Sr.
The entire cavalcade was kidnapped, and then executed one by one and buried in shallow graves. Even the victims’
vehicles were burned and buried to hide the evidence.

The horrific massacre and pictures of the killing field sent shock waves through the islands. It was the biggest
election-related massacre in the history of the Philippines as well as the largest number of journalists killed in a
single event. That the Ampatuans were responsible was quickly established by an eyewitness and journalists who at
the last moment didn’t go on the caravan. Initially there was resounding silence from Malacañang, the presidential
palace. For several days there were no arrests. The reason why was obvious: the Ampatuan clan were not only
members of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s party, Ampatuan Sr. was a key ally who had delivered vital block
votes that gave Arroyo a spurious majority in the 2004 election she stole. In the infamous “Hello, Garci” phone call
recordings during vote counting that were later leaked to the press, Comelec commissioner Virgilio Garcillano
assured her excellency that they would have no problems in Maguindanao.1 “Garci” was right about that: more than
140,000 of the 1 million vote margin she demanded came from that one province (“The Ampatuans, the Military and
Elections in Maguindanao: The Ties That Bind,” Bulatlat, 14 December). GMA owed the Ampatuans, big time.

As outrage mounted, eventually Ampatuan Jr. turned himself in, in hopes of quieting the uproar. But as politicians
denounced the killers as “monsters,” soon journalists were producing reams of investigative reports on warlordism
in Mindanao. What they showed is that all the national political dynasties were hooked up to all the feuding clans in
the South. Ampatuan Sr. had run the province of Maguindanao with an iron hand since 2001, “as father, grandfather,
uncle, and in-law to at least 10 mayors, vice mayors, and other local officials in the province” (Newsbreak, 26
November). He was first put in office, however, by Arroyo’s reputed liberal predecessor, Corazon Aquino. This
monster was Cory’s man. Moreover, while they were bitter enemies of the Ampatuans, the victimized
Mangudadatus were also allies of Arroyo, who ran the province of Sultan Kudarat next door. Probably because of
that, they figured that if they sent a caravan of women to register Toto Mangudadatu’s candidacy, and if there were
plenty of journalists along to record the event, they would be safe. It was a fatal miscalculation.

Since the controversy wouldn’t die down, on December 5 President Arroyo had Governor Ampatuan Sr. taken into
military custody for “questioning” and the province placed under martial law. This would allow troops to make
arrests without warrants and restore order, according to cabinet secretary Eduardo Ermita, the eminence grise who
runs Malacañang for GMA. Some 4,000 soldiers of the AFP (Armed Forces of the Philippines) flooded
Maguindanao. They discovered an arms cache buried in one of the Ampatuan compounds with enough weapons for
a military brigade. Moreover, the arms bore the markings of the Department of National Defense. What a surprise! It
was well-known that the AFP armed local clan militias to back up its brutal offensive against the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF) in the area. In particular, the AFP used the Ampatuans against the MILF in the
Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). After several years of truce and negotiations, in August 2008
the government suddenly junked a tentative deal recognizing the Muslims “ancestral domain” and relaunched the
war (see “Philippine Government Launches New War on Muslim Groups,” beginning on page 37 of this issue).

In classic Vietnam counterinsurgency style, the military cleared out whole swaths of the countryside, forcing three-
quarters of a million people into refugee camps. More than a year after the army launched its offensive against the
MILF rebels in this historically Muslim region, some 300,000 refugees remain, many of them living in soggy
makeshift huts and under buildings, afraid to go home. Up until the November 25 massacre, the Ampatuans were
Arroyo’s main political ally in holding the Bangsamoro population at bay. Accompanying the AFP on Mindanao
and other southern islands is “an elite, 600-soldier [U.S.] counterinsurgency force that operates in Mindanao
alongside Philippine armed forces,” as the New York Times (23 November) reported from the area only a couple of
days before the Maguindanao massacre. The “visiting forces” agreement for the Joint Special Operations Task Force
Philippines was renewed this year by the new Obama administration in Washington. And as the Philippine Daily
Inquirer (9 August 2008) remarked under a dramatic photo of a U.S. soldier in an armored personnel carrier in
Zamboanga City, with “no sign of leaving after 6 years” (now seven), “it sure is becoming a long visit.” We can also
be sure that the U.S. special forces are linked to the warlords’ militias, as they also are in Afghanistan.

The League for the Fourth International calls on the workers movement internationally, and particularly in the
United States, to demand the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. forces and agents from the Philippines. Philippine
workers should take action to force the imperialist forces out, as they did with Clark Air Force Base and Subic
Naval Base which were used as staging areas for the Vietnam War. Defenders of democratic rights should
vigorously oppose the martial law imposed in Maguindanao province. The military will carry out plenty of
warrantless arrests, but that will hardly produce justice. The precedent will be used elsewhere in the country to
impose “security” controls during the 2010 elections, and possibly even to postpone them and prolong Arroyo’s stay
in the presidential palace. There are always plenty of incidents by sinister forces that can be used to justify such
draconian measures, and if not they can be arranged. In addition, Filipino workers should act to force the
withdrawal of the AFP from the contested southern areas, and to defend the Bangsamoro people and their right to
self-determination.

Political Warlordism and Clan Wars in the Service of Capital

Political warlords have existed in the Philippines for quite a while, and not
just in the South. This is not some heritage from a distant feudal past, to be
ascribed to Spanish viceroys or Muslim sultans. This phenomenon of local
political clans and their private armies grew rampant under the dictatorship of
Ferdinand Marcos in the 1970s. It came in all varieties. Sugar barons in
Negros and the Visayas, logging lords and landlords in the Cordillera, the
Cojuangcos’ domains in Tarlac or the Marcos’ political fiefdom in Ilocos
Norte. Warlordism was particularly prevalent in Mindanao as the government
brought in huge numbers of colonists from elsewhere in the Philippines in
order to dominate the indigenous Muslim population. Arroyo has cultivated
warlords there, as did Cory Cojuangco Aquino before her. The clan wars of
Mindanao are an expression of decaying capitalism in this semi-colonial
country as whole regions are driven into penury and the bourgeois state needs
auxiliary forces to keep “order” – particularly in areas such as the
Bangsamoro region that are under military occupation.

Various left-wing groups have responded to the Maguindanao massacre by

pointing at the system of trapo (traditional politician) politics, which fostered
such political bosses’ domination over their fiefdoms. Sonny Melencio’s new
Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM – Power of the Masses Party) issued a
statement headlined, “Justice for the Maguindanao Heroes! End Trapo Politics Now!” It notes that “the political
impunity of the families and clans that control the political establishment is a permanent feature of politics in this
country. It’s the mark of trapo politics.” True enough, but when it talks of “ending trapo politics,” what does that
mean? Melencio calls to “end to elite rule and establish a government of the masa.” While elsewhere he refers
vaguely to “socialism” and “change,” this could be the “socialism” of a Hugo Chávez, whom he hails, which has
fostered an avaricious “Bolivarian bourgeoisie.” Melencio, a Filipino-style social democrat, carefully avoids any
reference to class struggle, and particularly to socialist revolution of the workers leading the peasantry and
oppressed peoples. Yet no (bourgeois) democratic program is going to put an end to “elite rule,” which is rooted in
capitalism.

The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the National Democratic Front (NDF) issued denunciations of
the gruesome massacre and called for opposition to martial law (as did the PLM). They also point to the complicity
of U.S. imperialism. Yet while hoping for an “Oust Gloria” movement to arise from the furor over the massacre, for
the last few months the Stalinist “national democratic” camp has been trying to join up with any “democratic” trapo
it can do a deal with. Last spring, NDF co-founder and current leader of the Bayan Muna party list Satur Ocampo,
and Gabriela women’s party list spokesperson Liza Maza announced the formation of a new Makabayang coalition
for the May 2010 elections. “This is the politics of genuine change … politikang mula sa masa [politics of the
masses],” Maza said in her speech, adding that the coalition stood for patriotism, democracy, people’s rights and
welfare. At the same time, Rep. Jose de Venecia called for “a coalition between the centrist forces and Makabayan”
(“Left-wing groups unveil new party coalition,” Inquirer.net, 16 April).

What this coalition with “centrists” meant was spelled out recently, as Ocampo went shopping for a leading
bourgeois presidential candidate to hook up with. Fellow Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño bragged that “we have
a sure base of more or less three million votes” to offer (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 13 November). Ocampo tried to
bargain with Benigno Aquino III, but although they had a common foe in GMA, the issue of Hacienda Luisita was a
sticking point. The Aquino family doesn’t want to give up their estate despite farmers’ demands that it be parceled
out under the agrarian reform law. Then Makbayan turned to Sen. Manuel Villar, the presidential candidate of the
Nacionalista Party (NP). Things seemed to be going alright until Villar signed an alliance with Ilocos Norte Rep.
Ferdinand (Bongbong) Marcos Jr., son of the former dictator (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 22 November). But in spite
of the “delicate position” this presented for Ocampo, he and Maza evidently overcame any qualms and on December
14 the two announced they would be “guest candidates” on the Nacionalistas’ Senate slate, and perhaps sharing in
the NP’s “campaign kitty.”

Political warlordism, clan warfare, trapos and the rest of the distinguishing features of Philippine politics are not
some incidental blemishes or warts that can be smoothed over with a little political Botox or removed with some
democratic cosmetic surgery. They are not anachronistic survivals from the past. They are essential characteristics of
capitalist rule in semi-colonial countries that cannot, in this imperialist epoch, achieve the essential elements of the
classical bourgeois revolutions without overthrowing the rule of the bourgeoisie. Agrarian revolution threatens even
the most liberal of the landlord-capitalists, as the Cojuangco-Aquinos have made clear with the Hacienda Luisita
massacre.2 To talk of democracy after the Maguindanao massacre and when even “progressive” politicians join the
trapos to get some of that vital political cash – is a cruel joke. As for national liberation, you certainly won’t have
that with U.S. special forces traipsing around Mindanao “advising” their Filipino counterparts on how to put down
rebels – like in the Jolo massacre of 1906 when U.S. Marines slaughtered 900 Moros fighting for independence.3 In
the Philippines, massacres tell the story.

All these tasks require that the workers seize power, with the support of impoverished farmers and oppressed
peoples, and proceed to the expropriation of the bourgeoisie and international socialist revolution. This is something
the Stalinists and social democrats cannot and will not fight for as they are buried in forming alliances, coalesce with
any bourgeois party or politician that they can in opposition to the Arroyo regime. It requires the formation of a
revolutionary party of the proletarian vanguard, a Leninist party based on the Trotskyist perspective of permanent
revolution. Such a party, independent of all bourgeois forces, would fight to defeat the warlords, to drive U.S. troops
out of the country and consistently defend the Bangsamoro and their fight for self-determination. This is the
program of the League for the Fourth International. ■