Despite the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s statement earlier this year that it will divest from companies that have business dealings with the Sudanese government, critics have said that statement lacks necessary teeth, raising questions about Boston University’s investment policies.
Vice President for Institute Affairs and MIT Corporation Secretary Kirk Kolenbrander released a statement May 14 announcing MIT “will divest as appropriate” from companies that fund the Sudanese government and thus “violate MIT’s investment principles.”
Numerous divestment proponents, such as MIT graduate student Kayvan Zainabadi, said the MIT declaration’s wording – specifically the phrase “as appropriate” – is insufficient and unclear compared to statements made by 43 other colleges in the United States and Canada that have directly divested from companies funding Sudan.
“[The statement] is very vague,” Zainabadi said. “[MIT officials] don’t name any companies, don’t give a timeline.
“It’s egregious of a university built on discovery and dissemination of information to withhold so much,” he continued.
According to a report released by the Sustainable Endowment Institute, MIT received an “F” grade in the category “Endowment Transparency” because of its lack “of disclosure of endowment holdings or its shareholder voting record.”
Zainabadi added that MIT’s brief statement was the only response the community has received after nine months of activism on campus.
“It’s a complete lack of honesty, a complete lack of transparency and if you ask me, a complete lack of respect,” he said.
Eric Cohen, chairman of the Fidelity Out of Sudan campaign and co-chairman of the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur, also said MIT’s press release lacked substance.
“I call on MIT to make a clearer statement on their intentions to divest from companies helping to fund the genocide in Darfur,” he said.
The offices of MIT President Susan Hockfield, Kolenbrander and MIT public relations office all refused to comment on the issue.
Before MIT made headlines, BU announced its decision to divest from companies directly funding the Sudanese government in May 2006, drawing praise from institutions and activists across the country. However, the university’s involvement with Fidelity Investments, the nation’s largest mutual fund company, has also caused some controversy.
As of April, Fidelity owned 1.1 billion shares of PetroChina, the Chinese-based oil conglomerate and Sudan’s largest oil provider. On May 16, Reuters reported that Fidelity had sold 91 percent of its holdings of PetroChina American Depositary Receipts on the New York Stock Exchange in the first quarter of 2007.
Yet, according to the Fidelity Out of Sudan campaign, only 38 percent of Fidelity’s shares in PetroChina were lodged in the NYSE, with the other 62 percent in the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Fidelity has not disclosed information on the status of its investments in the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.
Fidelity’s Chief Investment Officer, Philip Bullen, who serves on the BU Board of Trustees, declined comment through a Fidelity spokesperson.
BU offers employees the option of opening retirement accounts and pension plans with either Fidelity or TIAA-CREF, an option that Cohen commended.
“It’s a good thing that BU’s plan is not closed,” he said. “It is excellent that there are additional alternatives, but that doesn’t mean that people are aware of them.”
Fidelity Out of Sudan spokesman Bill Rosenfeld said the organization encourages BU and other institutions to educate its employees on the violence in Sudan and how they can help.
“We take a position that the first responsibility is to provide information to all participants about the situation in the Sudan,” Rosenfeld said. “[Inform employees] about which funds are more objectionable and provide all information to individuals in a clear, concise way and [also provide] the tools to make a change if they need to.”
Jirair Ratevosian, a recent BU graduate and one of the school’s leading voices for divestment, said he still remains wary about performing business with Fidelity despite its sale of PetroChina on NYSE.
“It’s a step in the right direction, but a small step in the right direction,” Ratevosian said. He and fellow BU graduate student Emily Church sent a letter to President Robert Brown on behalf of divestment activists from the BU community, including roughly 10 graduate students and a few faculty members, urging Brown to discontinue investing with Fidelity.
On April 5, Brown replied that it is the decision of individual account holders as to where their money is invested and not the responsibility of the university to regulate its staff’s financial decisions.
On May 3, Ratevosian and Church sent another message to Brown asking the university to educate pension plan participants on “Fidelity’s role in funding the genocide [in Darfur]” and inform employees on “alternative investment options for those who do not wish to continue their relationship with Fidelity,” as well as provide additional investment information.
Brown responded to this letter May 18, again stating his belief that it is not the BU’s responsibility to advise employees on money management.
Ratevosian said he hopes BU will educate employees about the situation in Sudan and the various investment options they have.
“We want them to issue a statement: Here’s the situation in Darfur,” he said. “Tell people they have a choice.”
BU spokesman Colin Riley echoed President Brown’s response.
“Every employee has the option to manage their retirement accounts with either TIAA-CREF or through Fidelity,” Riley said. “It is a personal decision.”
According to SaveDarfur.org, at least 400,000 Sudanese have been killed in the Darfur region since hostilities began among the government-supported Janjaweed militia and two rebel organizations in February 2003.