Yesterday the Hampshire College administration was trying to distance itself from the monumental action the school's Board of Trustees took in divesting from the Israeli occupation. Today Hampshire students have responded.
From the SJP statement:
Divestment from Apartheid South Africa did not prove politically
popular in 1977 when Hampshire became the first college in the U.S. to
take a stand. It is to be expected that the first of any movement
faces great pressure and criticism. SJP is disappointed that the
college is choosing to shy away from the political implications of its
action rather than embrace this moment. Regardless, a week ago
Hampshire College was invested in the Israeli occupation of Palestine.
Today, the college is no longer complicit in the funding of this
injustice. This is an irrefutable fact and a historical victory that
calls for both celebration and support.
Here is the entire response:
Below is SJP's response to Hampshire's administration's "clarifying statements." Although the college may now be seeking to avoid political fallout, the implications of divestment led by SJP is lost on no one:
Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) wishes to respond to the “statement of clarification” issued by Hampshire College’s president and chair of the board of trustees regarding Hampshire’s recent divestment from the State Street mutual fund. SJP wishes to shed light on the college’s withdrawal from the fund by presenting a chronology of events.
On May 8, 2008 SJP presented a proposal to the Committee at Hampshire on Investment Responsibility (CHOIR), a subcommittee of the Board of Trustees’ investment committee. The proposal was to divest from six companies due to their activities in the occupied Palestinian territories. On May 16, 2008 SJP made the same presentation to the full Board of Trustees, urging them to divest from the six corporations. On August 26, 2008 CHOIR voted “to recommend to the investment committee that Hampshire College divest of the following six companies: Caterpillar, Terex, Motorola, ITT, General Electric, United Technologies based on full consideration of the presentation by SJP.” This is a direct quotation from the CHOIR meeting minutes.
After this recommendation, the Investment Committee made the decision to divest from the mutual fund that held these companies. On Feb 7, 2009, the Investment Committee informed the Board of Trustees of its decision to divest. The administration denies that the decision was made in response to any concerns about any particular “region” or “political movement;” however SJP was explicitly asked by the administration what companies to avoid in the future in terms of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. This fact illustrates that the Israeli occupation and SJP’s work were undoubtedly the primary reasons for the decision to divest.
Furthermore, the violations of the other 200 companies cited by the “statement of clarification” were only researched days before the investment committee’s decision to divest from the mutual fund. For eight and a half months the only specific companies in the State Street fund that were discussed were the six companies SJP targeted. These facts prove that the decision was made on the grounds of the six companies’ involvement in the occupation of Palestine. We can only assume the reason the Board and administration chose to depoliticize this decision is because of the volatile nature of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
At the time of SJP’s original proposal to the Board, the College’s policy on socially responsible investment had not been revised since 1994 and the Board was considering dissolving the committee on investment responsibility. It is clear that if SJP had not introduced its divestment proposal, the college would still be invested in the State Street mutual fund.
In sum, Hampshire College divested from the mutual fund for many reasons, yet the Palestine-Israel conflict was the most prominent reason behind divestment; the decision to divest was not outside of the context of SJP’s efforts. It does not matter if the Hampshire administration issues a public statement condemning the occupation; the Hampshire community understands how and why we came to divest.
Divestment from Apartheid South Africa did not prove politically popular in 1977 when Hampshire became the first college in the U.S. to take a stand. It is to be expected that the first of any movement faces great pressure and criticism. SJP is disappointed that the college is choosing to shy away from the political implications of its action rather than embrace this moment. Regardless, a week ago Hampshire College was invested in the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Today, the college is no longer complicit in the funding of this injustice. This is an irrefutable fact and a historical victory that calls for both celebration and support.
