Hidesign speaks up for Gaza: Where are the global brands?

The brand has done what global giants with teams of PR professionals refused to do. Perhaps this is where change begins — not from the top, not from billion-dollar boardrooms, but from smaller voices that still dare to speak

Hidesign Gaza statement: This is not about elevating a brand to sainthood. Nor should one statement excuse a lifetime of silence. But in a landscape this bleak, every crack in the wall matters (AP Photo)

Written by: Anusree K C

5 min readSep 2, 2025 01:31 AM IST First published on: Jul 29, 2025 at 02:43 PM IST

Hidesign social media post on Gaza: At a time when images of starving children, people queuing up in lines holding pots for food from charity kitchens, and reports of starvation deaths from Gaza flood our timelines, the silence of the world’s biggest multinational corporations is not just deafening — it is damning.

It has been over one year and nine months since what has been widely condemned by human rights groups as a “genocide” perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians in Gaza. Big corporations have chosen comfort over conscience. Which is why a statement from an Indian luxury leather brand, Hidesign, supporting Gaza stands out as more than just an act of solidarity. It just shows the cowardice of the corporations.

Hidesign, known for handcrafted leather bags, is not what one expects when scanning the landscape for political declarations. And yet, three days ago, it issued a brief but pointed statement: A condemnation of Israel’s actions and a call for justice. They shared a post on their social media that said, “Let armies fight armies, not innocent children. We cry from our heart because silence shames us. We grieve with you, Gaza.” No branding exercise, no marketing spin — just a principled stand in a time of global horror. In a world where taking a moral stance comes with the risk of PR backlash, lawsuits, and loss of profit, this gesture from a relatively small business becomes monumental, in contrast to that of large brands like Apple, PepsiCo, Microsoft, Nike, and Google.

Companies that have not only avoided condemning Israel’s actions but, in some cases, actively suppressed pro-Palestinian speech on their platforms or continued business operations in Israel without pause. These corporations, whose revenue towers over the GDP of many countries, possess unmatched power to influence public discourse, and yet they shrink from it, clinging to neutrality as if it were a moral ground.

But neutrality in the face of genocide is complicity.

In India, one can see how solidarity with Palestine has taken the form of boycotts, protests, and campus sit-ins — and it has not been without consequence. Students and activists have been arrested under vague charges for holding posters or attending marches. On social media, pages calling for boycotts of brands with ties to Israel face shadow bans or outright removal. These crackdowns signal the state’s discomfort with dissent — especially when it disrupts capitalist alignments and disrupts the cushioned comfort of earning profits.

Also Read | With the collapse of the ceasefire, the war in Gaza is already lost

But even outside activism, the humanitarian cost is overwhelming. A week ago, the UN declared that the Gaza Strip was in the IPC Phase five — the final stage of hunger. UN and other aid workers have reported that at least 88 children have died of starvation in the past fortnight. Aid convoys are being bombed time and again or stopped from reaching the people of Gaza. Hospitals have been reduced to rubble, and for months, Israeli forces have been blocking aid to Gaza, thus worsening the situation. Children are not just dying — they are being starved as a weapon of war. In such a landscape, what does it mean for corporations to continue as if it is business as usual?

The answer lies in the logic of global capitalism, where ethics take a backseat to quarterly earnings. Brands are not incentivised to care. In fact, the cost of speaking up is often calculated in boardrooms — the possibility of market loss in the US, potential backlash from Zionist lobbies, the threat of investor unease. And so, silence becomes a strategy. Words like “both sides” and “complex conflict” are wheeled out to avoid clarity. In their quest to appear apolitical, these brands end up picking a side — the side of the oppressor.

Which brings us back to Hidesign. The brand has done what global giants with teams of PR professionals refused to do. It has taken a stand. And perhaps this is where change begins — not from the top, not from billion-dollar boardrooms, but from smaller voices that still dare to speak. From businesses that know that being ethical is not a branding strategy, but a moral imperative.

This is not about elevating a brand to sainthood. Nor should one statement excuse a lifetime of silence. But in a landscape this bleak, every crack in the wall matters.

anusree.kc@expressindia.com