Divestiture Debate Follows Carolina tradition

Posted on May 6, 1986

From the University Report (published by the GAA 1970-94)

Demonstrations on college campuses this spring urging divestiture of university investments in companies doing business in South Africa have taken many forms. Unfortunately, in some instances, most notably at the University of California at Berkeley, a few have become ugly, resulting in bodily injury, destruction of property, and arrests.

Here in Chapel Hill, students opposed to apartheid erected shanties on Polk Place just a short distance from South Building. These shanties were intended to draw attention to the living conditions of South African blacks and to encourage the Trustees of the University’s Endowment Board to divest of stock in companies that do substantial business in South Africa. Other students constructed a Berlin Wall, which was intended to make the point that abuses of human rights also occur behind the Iron Curtain, and that it was unfair to single out the South African issue. As you can see, the elements were present for unpleasantness, or worse, for our campus.

The University’s Board of Trustees, nearly three years ago, was among the first to direct the Endowment Board to invest only in companies that are in accordance with the Sullivan Principles, which have been used as the litmus test in evaluating American companies that do business in South Africa. Last fall the Board of Trustees adopted a resolution proposed by the Faculty Council that went beyond the Sullivan Principles, instructing the University to divest of all its stock in companies that give direct and substantial support to the South African government.

In early April, the Endowment Board called a special meeting to hear the students who had constructed the shanties and the Berlin Wall. After listening to their presentations, the Trustees deferred action until they could receive a report in late April which would review the record of those companies that are in accordance with the Sullivan Principles and to determine bow effectively the Sullivan Principles serve as a measurement.

Chancellor Christopher Fordham has handled this sensitive and potentially explosive matter with patience and understanding. He provided all parties an opportunity to express themselves, at the same time fulfilling his responsibility to assure the safety and security of the campus. Having permitted the construction of the shanties and the Berlin Wall, at the appropriate time, he also indicated when they would have to be taken down.

Alumni readers should be comforted by this debate. It shows that our students continue to be concerned about the world situation, are willing to inform themselves and to take action. Despite the diversity of opinion, all parties have been civil and respectful of one another’s positions. The Endowment Board and University Trustees have listened patiently, while remaining faithful to their charge to protect the University’s investments. Perhaps most significantly, as in the late ’60s when campus unrest was widespread, on our own campus these issues are debated without violence or ugliness. Chancellor Fordham’s own words were, “I bet on the students.” By giving the students the opportunity to express themselves, he was able to maintain the security and safety of this beautiful campus.

Colleges and universities traditionally serve as forums for debate of societal issues. Civil rights and Vietnam were debated in the 1960s. Concern for the environment drew demonstrations in the early ’70s. Now demonstrators are urging nuclear disarmament and an end to apartheid in South Africa.

The South Africa issue is a complex one. Were our Endowment Board to divest immediately, it is estimated that the University would lose three to four hundred thousand dollars for student scholarships and faculty aid. And, while addressing the important moral issue, it is likely that the stock divested would quickly be bought by others.

The Endowment Board, the Board of Trustees, Chancellor Fordham, his administrative colleagues, the faculty, and the students are wrestling with an issue for which there is no easy answer. What is important is that the issues are being debated and that those engaged in the debate respect the thoughts and opinions of others. This is in keeping with the Carolina tradition.

Yours at Carolina,

 

 

 

 

Douglas S. Dibbert ’70