Has Nestlé issued statements or taken actions in response to the October 2023 Israel–Hamas war?

Checked on December 13, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Executive summary

Nestlé publicly temporarily shut one of its production plants in Israel “as a precaution” on Oct. 19, 2023, and later reopened that facility; company executives also warned of “consumer hesitancy” in parts of the Middle East and Asia after the Oct. 7 attacks [1] [2] [3]. The company was also singled out in political reactions — notably Turkey’s parliament removed Nestlé instant coffee from its menus amid public outcry over perceived support for Israel [4].

1. Nestlé’s immediate operational response: a plant closure “as a precaution”

On Oct. 19, 2023 Nestlé said it had “temporarily shut down” one of its production plants in Israel, describing the move as a precautionary action amid the outbreak of hostilities after Oct. 7. Reuters reported the company as the first major consumer-products firm to announce an operational response to the conflict at that time [1]. Multiple industry outlets repeated that message and noted the closure was framed as focusing on employee safety [5] [6].

2. Reopening and resumption of activity

Shortly after the temporary closure, Nestlé reopened the plant — trade and food-industry outlets reported the facility was back in operation by Oct. 24–25, 2023, and quoted Nestlé leadership emphasizing colleague safety and business continuity [2] [7]. Those articles also noted Nestlé operates multiple sites in Israel — confectionery, beverages and nutrition facilities — underscoring why any shutdown drew attention [2] [7].

3. Executive commentary: consumer sentiment and commercial risk

Nestlé’s CEO Mark Schneider publicly warned of “consumer hesitancy” in the Middle East and Asia for Western brands following the Oct. 7 attack and subsequent Israeli military response; that comment tied business risk to heightened regional consumer sentiment and emergent boycott pressures [3]. Reporting highlights that Western consumer goods companies — including Nestlé — were tracking a reputational and sales impact in markets where public sentiment shifted quickly after the outbreak of war [3].

4. Political and public backlash: parliamentary and boycott actions

Nestlé became a target in political gestures: Turkey’s parliament removed Coca‑Cola and Nestlé instant coffee from its menus in early November 2023 as part of a response to “huge public outcry” alleging the companies supported Israel; Reuters noted the parliament did not specify how Nestlé had supported Israel [4]. That action illustrates how corporate operational steps or perceived positions can feed into state-level symbolic measures, even when companies say closures were precautionary [4].

5. What the sources do and don’t say about corporate statements on the wider conflict

Available sources document Nestlé’s plant closure, reopening and executive comments about consumer hesitancy [1] [2] [3]. The reporting does not provide detailed Nestlé statements taking moral or political positions on the Israeli military campaign, humanitarian conditions in Gaza, or allegations of war crimes; available sources do not mention a formal company stance on those substantive political issues [1] [3] [2] [7].

6. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas in the coverage

News wires (Reuters, The Business Standard) emphasize operational safety and corporate caution — framing Nestlé’s actions as standard crisis-management [1] [5]. Other outlets and political actors framed Nestlé as complicit or part of a Western commercial ecosystem supporting Israel, prompting symbolic boycotts like Turkey’s parliament menu change [4]. The differing portrayals reflect competing agendas: media business coverage centers on employee safety and continuity, while political actors use consumer outrage to apply reputational pressure without detailing corporate conduct [1] [4].

7. Limitations and how to read this record

This summary relies on contemporaneous reporting that documents discrete actions (precautionary plant closure, later reopening) and CEO commentary about consumer sentiment [1] [2] [3]. The sources do not include Nestlé’s full corporate communications archive, internal memos, or any formal policy statements addressing the legality or morality of the war; therefore any stronger claim about Nestlé’s broader political posture or donations is not supported by the provided reporting — available sources do not mention those topics [1] [3] [4] [2].

8. Bottom line for readers

Firm-level actions were pragmatic and limited: Nestlé temporarily suspended operations at one Israeli plant, then resumed them, and its CEO warned of consumer hesitancy in the region — actions that sparked political symbolism such as removal from a parliamentary menu in Turkey [1] [2] [3] [4]. For a fuller accounting of Nestlé’s statements or philanthropic and political activities connected to the conflict, consult the company’s direct releases and a broader set of investigative reports; those materials are not included in the set of sources provided here [1] [3] [4] [2].

Want to dive deeper?
Has Nestlé suspended operations or investments in Israel or Gaza since October 2023?
What public statements has Nestlé made about the Israel–Hamas war and humanitarian aid efforts?
Have Nestlé employees or unions protested the company’s response to the October 2023 conflict?
Did Nestlé change its supply chains or partnerships in the region after October 2023?
How have investors and ESG analysts reacted to Nestlé’s handling of the Israel–Hamas war?