The View | Xinjiang cotton: H&M and Nike’s differing fates hold lessons for global brands

Amid rising tensions in Anchorage, Alaska, last month, top Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi told US Secretary of State Antony Blinken that the two countries should mind their own business. Within days, this tension had spilled over into the business lane. The collateral damage? Sweden’s H&M.

Last September, H&M said it had stopped using Xinjiang cotton following the advice of the Better Cotton Initiative in March. This went unnoticed until March 24 this year, when a short Weibo post by the Chinese Communist Youth League ignited national rage.

Within hours, H&M had vanished from China’s virtual space. H&M products were taken off e-commerce shelves, and H&M retail outlets had disappeared from Chinese digital maps.

H&M has not apologised as demanded, to the surprise, perhaps, of even the Chinese. After all, during the last wave of Chinese boycotts of global fashion houses over Hong Kong, Versace, Coach and Tiffany had quickly apologised.

The latest national boycott triggered by H&M has quickly spread to many other brands, including Nike. As the row escalated, Chinese state media Global Times cautioned against evil forces fanning the flames of public rage, pointing out that footage online may be used to manipulate, such as the video of Nike shoes set on fire in apparent protest, which had actually been posted a week earlier.

That same night, Nike debuted a new shoe on Tmall. It sold out instantly, completely unaffected by the boycott. Make no mistake, Nike is not without risks in China. Yet it has offered no apology and its sales channels remain virtually unscathed.