Drumbeat for Darfur advocates take action

Why divest?
Are U.S. companies investing in Sudan?
Is it possible that my savings and retirement funds are being used to fund this genocide?
Which companies are targeted for divestment?
What is the criteria for choosing these companies?
Does divestment work?

Why divest?
Divestment is one important strategy for applying economic pressure on the government of Sudan. By cutting the flow of funds that line President Omar al-Bashir’s pockets, the Sudan divestment movement aims to persuade Bashir to take positive action to end the genocide in Darfur. Divesting from companies that are doing business in Sudan cuts off a major source of revenue for the Sudanese government, creating a real loss for Sudanese leaders perpetrating this genocide.

Divestment is also a strategy for influencing the government of China, which has not only defended the Sudanese government within the U.N. Security Council, but also provides the government with about half of its $2 billion in oil export revenues and continues to violate a U.N. arms embargo on Sudan.

Are U.S. companies investing in Sudan?
In 1997, the United States applied sanctions to Sudan due to its role as a state sponsor of terrorism and its oppression of minorities in southern Sudan. Although U.S. companies cannot do business in Sudan, Americans can invest in foreign companies that do. Through our savings and retirement accounts, investment companies invest billions of U.S. dollars in foreign companies that operate in Sudan.

Is it possible that my savings and retirement funds are being used to fund this genocide?
Yes. But you can take action by raising the drumbeat for divestment!

Here are two ways to find out more:

Are you investing in companies that are fueling the genocide in Darfur? Use the Sudan Divestment Task Force’s screening tool to find out <link to http://www.sudandivestment.org/getInvolved.asp>

Divest your company, organization, union, university, or congregation <link to http://www.savedarfur.org/page/content/divest_your_organization/ >

Which companies are targeted for divestment?
The Sudan Divestment Task Force has laid out a careful divestment model which has created ranked categories of companies warranting scrutiny. Of these companies, approximately 25-30 of them are considered “highest offenders,” primarily from the oil and energy sectors.

Ninety percent of Sudan’s export revenues derive from oil industry operations, and Sudan uses an estimated 70-80 percent of its oil revenue to purchase weapons used in its genocidal campaign in Darfur.

What are the criteria for choosing these companies?
The Sudan Divestment Task Force model <link: http://www.sudandivestment.org/docs/task_force_targeted_divestment_model.pdf > consists of a two-stage process beginning with an engagement period with key companies in which they are encouraged to take steps to reduce their contribution to inadvertently supporting the genocide. If this is unsuccessful, a company is targeted for divestment. A company may be selected if it:
• Has a business relationship with the government, a government-created project, or companies affiliated with a government-created project.
• Provides little benefit to the disadvantaged populations of Sudan.
• Has not developed a substantial business-practice policy that acknowledges and deals with the fact that the company may be inadvertently contributing to the Sudanese government’s genocidal capacity.

Does divestment work?
Past divestment movements have achieved major social and political change. One example is the case of South Africa, where divestment helped end the decades-old apartheid regime.

South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu wrote, “Divestment from apartheid South Africa was fought by ordinary people at the grassroots. Faith-based leaders informed their followers, union members pressured their companies' stockholders and consumers questioned their store owners. Students played an especially important role by compelling universities to change their portfolios. Eventually, institutions pulled the financial plug, and the South African government thought twice about its policies.”

During the Sudanese government’s war on southern Sudan, the government responded only when economic pressure (along with U.S. diplomatic pressure) increased. Facing grassroots pressure, Canadian oil company Talisman ended its operations in Sudan in 2002 and other oil companies followed. In 2003, the Khartoum regime began negotiations to end the 21-year-long war.