State should divest from Sudan

Maybe economic pressure can stop genocide

Published January 3, 2007 at midnight

Text size

More Editorials

When economic sanctions against South Africa's apartheid regime brought down that hateful system, Colorado couldn't claim even partial credit. Despite urgent efforts by then-Rep. Wilma Webb, the legislature took no action, and the University of Colorado even opposed student protests urging divestment.

Darfur may be different. The genocide in western Sudan has sparked a national campaign for divestment, and House Speaker Andrew Romanoff plans to introduce a bill in the upcoming legislative session. It deserves, and we expect will have, broad bipartisan support.

Exactly which state entities will be covered isn't clear as yet, but the Colorado Public Employees' Retirement Association, with some $36 billion in assets, may be among them, since Romanoff in October asked PERA directors to examine the fund's assets and to begin divestment even before a bill was passed.

In December the CU regents voted to instruct the university's treasurer to sell its investments in companies that do business in Sudan. Though the amount of money involved is small - probably about $1 million, according to CU Treasurer Don Eldhart - it is symbolically important. Every time another institution joins the divestment movement, as about 30 already have, others are encouraged to do the same.

Unlike the South African model, which covered all aspects of society, the strategy chosen by advocates for Darfur is carefully targeted, according to the Web site http://www.sudandivest ment.org, "to those companies that meet all of the following criteria: have a business relationship with the government or government-created project, impart minimal benefit to the country's underprivileged, and have expressed no significant corporate governance policy regarding the current situation in Darfur."

The purpose is to put pressure on the government, which relies on revenues from oil to fund its military adventures, while having minimal effect on ordinary people. And oil revenues, in turn, are dependent on foreign direct investment, so the movement has some leverage. A similar campaign helped to bring about an end to fighting in southern Sudan in 2005.

The pressure on Sudan will unfortunately be eased somewhat because China is a major investor in Sudan's young oil industry. China, which has plenty of human rights issues of its own, is not particularly squeamish about other people's. But that is their choice.

Colorado's choice should be to refuse to participate in activities that have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and forced millions to flee their homes.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News