The Jerusalem Post has picked up on the Hampshire divestment movement and reports that:
A pro-Palestinian student group at Hampshire College in western Massachusetts irked the college administration by disseminating a message on-line Thursday congratulating the school for becoming the first US college to divest from companies benefitting the "Israeli occupation of Palestine." . . .
An SJP statement insisted the group had "pressured Hampshire College's Board of Trustees to divest from six specific companies due to human rights concerns in occupied Palestine. Over 800 students, professors and alumni have signed SJP's 'institutional statement' calling for the divestment."
The College disputes this assertion, saying they are not divesting from Israel per se, but because the six companies in question "violate the college's policy on socially responsible investments." When pressed they admitted that the decision to divest was "based on a complaint by Students for Justice in Palestine about six companies doing business in Israel." Enough said.
Hampshire also sent this explanation out the alumni today:
From: <alumni@hampshire.edu>
Date: February 12, 2009 6:15:26 PM EST
Subject: Hampshire College Board of Trustees investment decisions of February 7, 2009Dear alums, parents, and friends,
There has been some inaccurate publicity surrounding an investment decision made by the board of trustees on February 7, 2009. In anticipation of questions you may have, I send the following statement to explain what actually took place:
Statement of Clarification from Sigmund Roos 73F, chair of the board of trustees, Ralph Hexter, president, and Aaron Berman, vice president and dean of faculty, regarding trustees’ actions on college investments
We write to correct numerous reports circulating about actions taken by the Hampshire College board of trustees on February 7, 2009. The facts are as follows:
• On February 7, 2009, the Hampshire College board of trustees accepted the report of its investment committee, which earlier had voted, without reference to any country or political movement, to transfer assets held in a State Street fund to another fund.
• Based on a comprehensive review of the fund by the trustee investment committee, administrators and an outside consultant, the college found that this fund held stocks in well over 100 companies engaged in business practices that violate the college’s policy on socially responsible investments. These violations include: unfair labor practices, environmental abuse, military weapons manufacturing, and unsafe workplace settings.
• The review also led the board of trustees to vote to revise its 1994 socially responsible investment policy to bring it up-to-date with current standards and practices, and, pending revision, to suspend that policy.
• The review of the State Street fund was undertaken at the request of a sub-committee of the investment committee, to address a petition from a student group, Students for Justice in Palestine. The investment committee’s decision, however, was based on the consultant’s finding that the State Street fund included 100-plus companies engaged in multiple violations of the college’s investment policy; the decision expressly did not pertain to a political movement or single out businesses active in a specific region or country.
• No other report or interpretation of the actions of February 7, 2009 by the Hampshire College board of trustees is accurate.
The short version is that while Hampshire apparently did not divest only from the Israeli occupation, they did find that they wanted to be sure they were not invested in companies benefiting from the occupation. Sounds like divestment to me. (Adam Horowitz)
