Author: Daniel

www.standupmichigan.org darfuraction@umich.edu

What is divestment?

Divestment is the opposite of investment; it is removing invested funds from a company. This targeted divestment calls for divestment from companies that are directly or indirectly helping the Sudanese government perpetuate genocide. Because the ultimate goal is to protect citizens, the divestment is tailored to have maximum effect on the government but minimal harm to the Sudanese people, as well as the divester’s financial health. When an institution divests from these offending companies, demand for their stocks fall and share prices decline. This conveys to the companies as well as the Sudanese government that the genocide in Darfur is making the country an undesirable place to do business. As a result, government behavior will change to keep business in Sudan or the offending companies will leave Sudan, withdrawing money that helps purchase military equipment for the genocide. Divestment both creates an economic penalty for genocide and reduces the government’s ability to fund the campaign.

Tell me more about Darfur...

The ongoing genocide in the Darfur region of western Sudan began in 2003, when the government of Sudan began sponsoring attacks against the people of Darfur. The genocide has claimed at least 200,000 lives and displaced more than 2.5 million people. Violence, disease, and displacement continue to kill thousands of innocent Darfurians every month. In February 2003, frustrated by poverty and neglect from the government in Khartoum (the Sudanese capital), two Darfurian rebel groups launched an uprising against the Khartoum government. Claiming to be putting down the insurrection, the government responded with a scorched-earth campaign against the innocent civilians of Darfur, enlisting the janjaweed, a militia drawn from members of Arab tribes in the region, to perpetrate the attacks. Since February 2003, the government-sponsored Janjaweed have used rape, displacement, organized starvation, threats against aid workers, and mass murder to perpetrate genocide.
As the crisis continues today, the intentional displacement of millions has contributed to a major refugee crisis that now is spilling over to its neighbors, Chad and the Central African Republic. Violence continues today not only against Darfurians, but additionally towards humanitarian workers. In the past four years, only a contingent of roughly 7,000 troops from the African Union (AU), which severely lacks resources and experience, has been stationed in Darfur. As of June 2007, the government of Sudan has accepted a proposal for a 23,000 member joint UN-AU “hybrid” force. However, given Sudan’s history of deceit and empty promises, many remain skeptical of their commitment. Additionally, the international community has yet to provide enough funding for the force, which is not expected to deploy until 2008.

Doesn’t it hurt ordinary citizens?

No. Divestment only targets the companies most greatly offending companies in Sudan, and only those companies that have a lot invested in the government. Companies involved in medicine, education, general consumer goods, and agriculture are specifically excluded. About 80% of Sudanese citizens are employed in agriculture, and thus excluding agriculture from divestment is very important in helping civilians. The Sudanese government gives very little to Sudanese citizens and thus divestment will disproportionately affect the government. Over 70% of government revenue goes toward military spending, development programs in Sudan are mainly financed by international assistance. So don’t worry, this is a good thing that has positive short and long term effects for the Sudanese people!

What do the experts say about it?

"The government does not have a heavy development agenda--it's not as though the government is busy building schools in Darfur. It's a pretty clear case of this money being used against the government's own people.” – Economy and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz
"In the view of some analysts, divestment campaigns may prove more effective than sanctions…The Sudanese government has publicly urged an end to divestment actions, underscoring the potential sting of their impact." – Roberta Cohen, Senior Advisor, The Brookings Institution

Will it change Sudan’s behavior?

Divestment, on a large enough scale, will place substantial economic pressure on the Sudanese government to end the genocide. Sudan's genocidal military campaign against Darfurians relies heavily on foreign direct investment (FDI) from companies international institutions invest in. If these institutions divest from offending companies, such businesses will have an incentive to leave the country, taking away this investment. The companies will also have an incentive to pressure the Sudanese government to end the genocide. The government of Sudan has historically demonstrated substantial positive changes in its behavior due to exactly this kind economic pressure.

What events do you have coming up?

STAND Meetings	Mondays 8pm	Ginsberg Center (aka Madelon Pound Building) 1024 Hill St.
DarfurFast	December 5th	Look for us in Angell
Fundraising Dinner	January	Noodles & Co.
Darfur Diaries Screening	January	Michigan Theatre

Questions? darfuraction@umich.edu