LONDON: The co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s has said the ice cream brand will be destroyed if it remains with parent company Magnum, the BBC reported.

Ben Cohen’s remarks are the latest in a longtime feud between Ben & Jerry’s and Magnum over the former’s freedom to pursue its social mission and retain independence over its board.

The Magnum Ice Cream Co. on Monday began trading on the European stock market after spinning off from owner Unilever.

Magnum wants to strengthen Ben & Jerry’s “powerful, nonpartisan values-based position in the world,” a spokesperson said.

In 2000, Ben & Jerry’s was sold to Unilever as part of a deal that saw it retain an independent board and the right to pursue its social mission.

But the deal led to clashes between the Vermont, US brand and its owner.

The feud has now been inherited by Magnum.

Ben & Jerry’s has long supported the Palestinian cause. In 2021 it prohibited the sale of its products in areas occupied by Israel.

In response, its Israeli operation was sold by Unilever to a local licensee.

In October, Cohen said the brand was prevented from launching an ice cream product that expressed “solidarity with Palestine.”

Ahead of its spin-off from Unilever last month, Magnum said that Anuradha Mittal, chair of Ben & Jerry’s, “no longer met the criteria to serve.”

Mittal has held the position since 2018 but was encouraged to resign following an internal audit conducted by Magnum, which found a “series of material deficiencies in financial controls, governance and other compliance policies, including conflicts of interest,” according to a spokesperson.

“So far, the trustees have not fully addressed the deficiencies identified.”

Mittal, speaking to Reuters, said: “The so-called audit of the foundation was a manufactured inquiry, engineered to attempt to discredit me.

“It is important to understand that this is not simply an attack on me as chair, it is Unilever’s attempt to undermine the authority of the board itself.”

Cohen said that Magnum had “no standing to determine who the chair of the independent board should be.”

“Therefore, by trying to (change the chair of the board), I would say that Magnum is not fit to own Ben & Jerry’s.”

Ben & Jerry’s must be either owned by a “group of investors that support the brand” and sought to encourage its values, or Magnum should make a “180-degree turnaround and say they support the chairman of the independent board,” Cohen said.

Mittal said she had no plans to step down from the board ahead of Magnum’s share market entry this week.

Cohen is still an employee of Ben & Jerry’s and is the most high-profile spokesperson for the brand. But he told the BBC that under Magnum’s ownership, the ice cream maker could end up losing its most “loyal” customers.

“If the company continues to be owned by Magnum, not only will the values be lost but the essence of the brand will be lost,” he said.

Magnum CEO Peter ter Kulve told the Financial Times on Sunday that Ben & Jerry’s founders — Cohen and Jerry Greenfield — were in their 70s and “at a certain moment they need to hand over to a new generation.”

Greenfield left the company this year over concerns that its social mission was being stifled.

Cohen said: “As they destroy Ben and Jerry’s values, they will destroy that following and they will destroy that brand. It’ll become just another piece of frozen mush that is just going to lose a lot of market share.”