Stanford’s rich history of divestment movements

Students protested for divestment from companies involved in South African apartheid in 1977 (TODD SITRIN/The Stanford Daily)

Students protested for divestment from companies involved in South African apartheid in 1977 (TODD SITRIN/The Stanford Daily)

Stanford Out of Occupied Palestine (SOOP) is not the first divestment movement to take Stanford’s campus by storm. Calls for divestment from partners of the Sudanese government and coal companies and a historical movement to divest from South Africa marks Stanford’s history with attempts at divestment.

Some of the movements have been successful, while others have failed, but divestment has repeatedly been a contentious issue on campus.

“Divestment is an act that should be made rarely and carefully,” Stanford president John Hennessy said in 2005 about Stanford’s decision to divest from companies involved with the oppressive Sudanese government.

South Africa

On May 9, 1977, over 1,000 students participated in a sit-in protest at Old Union to object to Stanford’s decision to not divest from the apartheid-era South Africa government, resulting in 294 arrests, most of them students. The very next day, over 900 students returned to Old Union once again, chanting, “Apartheid means profit, Stanford won’t stop it.”

Apartheid was a system of racial segregation in South Africa. Non-white South Africans were stripped of their citizenship, denied political representation, and forcibly removed from their homes and relocated to racially segregated neighborhoods.

Stanford had received securities of $18.9 million from South African corporations and earned up $45,000 from dividends from its investments in South Africa. Students rallied for divestment, which they estimated would cost Stanford $125 million in endowment assets spread among 59 corporations.

After an announcement by the Board of Trustees that Stanford would not be divesting, students laid down behind the cars of board members in protest. That night, students parked their cars to block the board members from their homes. Most of the students were united in the international movement to divest from South Africa, and various faculty members also called for university divestment, claiming that they were willing to take a pay cut if Stanford divested.

On February 13th, 1985, Stanford threatened to sell nearly $4.7 million worth of stock in Motorola, Inc. if it continued to sell to South African military or police. This caused Motorola to publicly back down and no longer sell to South African military.

Though university president Donald Kennedy would reiterate numerous times that Stanford would not divest, this did not stop students from protesting. This marked the largest student protest on Stanford’s campus since the Vietnam War.

Sudan

“Our question for you is this: In 10 or 20 years, what information will be found about what our university did in response to this genocide?” wrote Nikki Serapio ’07 in an op-ed on May 12, 2005. “How did our generation of students or our administration act? How will we be remembered? It is time to do something; for the people of Darfur and for our own consciences.”

During the conflict in Sudan, there had been one death every three minutes, and one out of three Darfuris had been driven out of their homes. In a civil war, the Sudanese released a militia group known as the Janjaweed upon its people, resulting in over 70,000 deaths.

Described as “little short of hell on earth” by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the mass genocide of Darfuri people in Western Sudan caused a unanimous vote by the Stanford Board of Trustees to divest from four companies supporting the Sudanese government, in one of which, PetroChina, Stanford had over $1 million invested.

Fossil Fuels

In May of last year, Stanford announced it would be divesting from coal companies, making Stanford the first major university to make such an effort.

This is just the beginning for the movement, as Fossil Free Stanford is currently pushing for full divestment from fossil fuel industries.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Stanford did not divest from South Africa. Stanford divested from at least five companies doing business in South Africa. We apologize for this error.

 

Contact Jeremy Quach at jquach ‘at’ stanford.edu.

About Jeremy Quach

Jeremy Quach is a sophomore Desk Editor for the Student Groups beat and is from Kansas City, Kansas. He can often be found smiling, stuffing his face full of french fries, and mumbling Beatles lyrics to himself. He can be contacted at jquach ‘at’ stanford.edu.
  • James Meeker

    If they really care about racism and all of that, they would support Israel; and boycott, divest, and sanction the Palies. From a 2013 Pew poll on Muslims worldwide:

    89% of Muslim Palestinians want Sharia (Islamic law) to be “the official law of the land” (p. 9)

    40% of Muslim Palestinians support suicide bombings or other forms of violence against civilians in the name of Islam (Pp. 10, 70)

    48% of Muslim Palestinians see polygamy as morally acceptable (p. 11)

    51% of Muslim Palestinians believe that there is only one correct interpretation of Sharia (p. 44)

    95% of Muslim Palestinians who pray several times a day and 68% who pray less often believe that Sharia should be the law of the land (p. 47)

    44% of Muslim Palestinians believe that Sharia must be enforced upon non-Muslims as well (p.48)

    76% of Muslim “Palestinians” who say Sharia should be the law of the land, favor corporal punishment, like cutting off hands for theft, etc. (p.52)

    84% of Muslim Palestinians who say Sharia should be the law of the land, favor stoning as a punishment for adultery (p.54)

    66% of Muslim Palestinians who say Sharia should be the law of the land, support the death penalty for one leaving Islam (p. 55)

    40% of Muslim Palestinians prefer a strong leader over democracy (p. 60)

    72% of Muslim Palestinians believe that religious leaders should have either a large influence or some influence in politics (p. 64)

    65% of Muslim Palestinians say that religious parties are either better or the same as secular parties. Only 29% say that they are worse (p. 66)

    92% of Muslim Palestinians say that drinking alcohol is immoral (p. 76)

    87% of Muslim Palestinians say that a woman must always obey her husband (p. 93)

    33% of Muslim Palestinians say that a woman should be able to divorce her husband (p. 94)

    43% of Muslim Palestinians say that sons and daughters should have equal inheritance rights (p. 95)

    44% of Muslim Palestinian males believe that it is a woman’s right to decide whether to wear a veil (p. 97)

    89% of Muslim Palestinians believe that only Islam leads to salvation (p. 110)

    82% of Muslim Palestinians believe that it is a religious duty to convert others to Islam (p. 112).

  • ThisIsPalestine

    “In a civil war, theSudanese released a militia group known as the Janjaweed upon its people, resulting in over 70,000 deaths.”

    Sure puts Palestinian whining about checkpoints in perspective, doesn’t it?

  • mxm123

    But does not negate Israeli ethnic cleansing/ apartheid does it ?

  • Guest

    If anybody is ethnic cleansing, it is the palestinians. Nobody is asking the 1.2 million Muslim citizens of Israel to leave but the ‘palestinians’ are asking for the removal of all Jewish neighborhoods (about 500,000 folks) from Judea-Samaria – the future 57th Muslim/22nd Arab state to be called palestine.

  • mxm123

    Nice of you to omit that Israel got the majority of the land for its minority Jewish population. And now you want to steal the rest.

  • ThisIsPalestine

    Like I said, it puts it into perspective. When you’re more upset that Palestinians have to pass through a security checkpoint than 70,000 Sudanese people are dead, it questions just how much you actually care about human rights.

  • mxm123

    Like you care so much about Sudanese. For you any excuse to divert from Israeli ethnic cleansing/ apartheid is just that. An excuse.

  • ThisIsPalestine

    I care more about the Sudanese than BDS cares about the Palestinians.

  • Free Palestine

    Where was this article before the vote?

    How convenient of the Daily to run 3 anti-divestment pieces on the day of the vote and then this article — which tells the facts and therefore reflects well on the divestment effort — after the fact.

    We know which side you’re on, Daily.

  • Alumnus ’11

    What about the previous Israel divestment efforts? Worth noting that this is a fad that seems to reappear every 3 years as students turn over.