January 14, 2025 Despite the fact that numerous big brands have either heavily scaled back or withdrawn from the Russian market altogether, many international names continue to do business there. With the war in Ukraine now extending into its third year, more and more consumers are demanding action from companies still operating in Russia. Political scientist and communication specialist, Dr. Kari Odermann, explains here the role that such brands play in funding Russia’s war economy: Companies that continue doing business in Russia often cite employee welfare as a key reason for staying, carefully avoiding discussions of the massive profits some, like PepsiCo, Mars, and Mondelez International, have generated since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Minimizing profits in Russia could positively position these companies at the important point where shareholder interests and societal impact overlap. Instead, they are leveraging Russia’s war-time economy for profit, and failing to incorporate commonwealth-oriented practices exposing a significant gap between their corporate social responsibility claims and actual business operations. Russia’s corporate tax rate is set to rise to 25% next year, thickening the connection between company profits and the country’s war chest. Considering this direct association, what can the conscious consumer do to make sure that their money is not propping up unethical brands? Here we’ll scrutinize some popular products and suggest some similar goods on the market as potential alternatives. The lack of transparency issue With the conscious consumer showing that they have the will to shop ethically, in many cases it’s a lack of means, in this case information, which is stopping them from acting on their good intentions and changing their shopping habits. A PissedConsumer survey conducted in February 2024 that looked into Americans' attitudes towards brands in Russia found that 86.3% won’t support companies that refuse to leave Russia, which is an increase from 77.3% in 2022. This statistic mirrors the public’s growing disappointment with brands putting concerns over their bottom line far before any ethical responsibilities. Yet, despite this majority sentiment, many consumers are left in the dark with regard to the links between common supermarket staples and companies still operating in Russia. For instance, the findings of another PissedConsumer survey show us that 79.8% of the public are unaware that household names like Oreo and Ritz Crackers are actually brand names of Mondelez International, who persist in going against the grain by supporting and profiting from the Russian economy. Why is ethical consumerism so important? Countless conscious consumers feel personally moved by global issues and seek to make a difference through whatever means available to them. One of the most important ways to promote positive change is through ethical consumerism, which involves making thoughtful and responsible shopping choices. A clear account of what their money is potentially funding enables consumers to, as they say, vote with their wallets. Essential to this freedom of choice is the availability of information that enables consumers to shop for alternative products to those offered by brands supporting Russia. Brands that remain in Russia and alternative options Based on Research carried out in December 2024 and data from B4Ukraine and KSE Institute, we’ve compiled an overview of some well-known products put out by companies still operating in Russia and a selection of ethical brands that provide alternatives to suit the conscious consumer. Oreo (Mondelez International) Under the umbrella of Mondelez International, Oreo maintains a presence throughout Russia in the face of condemnation and sanctions. Consumer reviews suggest that some are already unhappy with the company’s practices, with many complaining of diminishing product volume and quality control. Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: Newman’s Own Newman-O’s Crème Filled Chocolate Cookies, Great Value Twist & Shout Chocolate Sandwich Cookies (Walmart), Whole Foods 365 Chocolate Sandwich Cremes, Goodie Girl Chocolate Creme Sandwich Cookies. Quaker Oats (PepsiCo) PepsiCo continues to generate massive revenues in Russia. According to the recent B4Ukraine report, PepsiCo paid $135 million in profit taxes to the Russian state in paid in profit tax in 2023 alone. Many will be unaware that Quaker Oats is owned by PepsiCo. Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: First Street (Smart & Final), Purely Elizabeth Organic Superfood Oatmeal, McCann’s Irish Oatmeal, Better Oats Organic Bare Snickers (Mars Inc.) Mars continues to produce products in Russia, despite a partial withdrawal. Popular treats like Snickers and Kit-Kat generate huge profits, part of which prop up the Russian economy. Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: Tony’s Chocolonely, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Hershey’s Kisses, Tunnock’s Caramel Log. Ritz Crackers (Mondelez International) Another product of the Mondelez corporation, Ritz Crackers is a regular on shopping lists worldwide, but, in addition to conscientious concerns about the business behind them, many consumers are also disappointed with product quality. Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: Simple Mills Almond Flour Crackers, Late July Organic Classic Rich Crackers, Pepperidge Farm Golden Butter Crackers, Sonoma Creamery Crackers. Charmin (Procter & Gamble) Due to maintaining links with the Russian economy, the owner of the Charmin toilet roll brand, Procter & Gamble, was included in the list of international war sponsors by the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption (NAPC). Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: Costco Kirkland Signature, Zewa, Presto!, Quilted Northern. Tide, Ariel (Procter & Gamble) Detergent brands Tide and Ariel are both owned by Procter & Gamble. Alternatives to brands supporting Russia include: Persil (Henkel), Biokleen, Blueland, Arm & Hammer, HEX. Companies that put people before profit While some companies have chosen short-term profits over longstanding reputation, many have overcome the temporary financial challenges involved in leaving the Russian market and moved forward with their reputations and conscience intact. In October this year, Unilever finalized its exit from Russia, despite obstacles such as exit taxes. Danone, whilst in the process of pulling out, had its assets seized by the state – highlighting the increasing risk to businesses that drag their feet in exiting Russia. After shutting its Russia branches in 2022, KFC overcame various hurdles and exited completely in April 2023. All leading by example as the opportunity to take a stand gets more difficult by the day. As CEO of PissedConsumer.com, Michael Podolsky, puts it: The window to pull out is closing, as Russia makes it more difficult for companies to leave, further tightening laws as the clock ticks on. Dollar figures cannot measure the human cost of war. Complicity in bloodshed and aggression cannot be rationalized by percentages. While it may seem prudent to sit on the fence, neutrality will always play into the hands of the oppressor. Hold brands accountable for their actions Corporate priorities in the face of the war in Ukraine serve as a stark reminder of the power of consumer choices. Ethical consumerism through small actions at the supermarket can catalyze huge change. In this case, all it takes is a slight adjustment to shopping habits to make a real difference.