DO THE math on 87 percent of 8.5 percent of the undergraduate body. It's no mandate. Public opinion is fickle, and student referenda in fall elections carry very little weight. Why should they, when the population of students voting was likely dwarfed by the population of students who had no idea that there was an election at all? But what 87 percent of the 8.5 percent of the undergraduate population agreed upon last week shouldn't be dismissed.
That ballot initiative, which stated that because "the government of Sudan and the militias it sponsors have killed more than 400,000 people and left 3 million displaced in the western region of Darfur. The University of Virginia SHOULD NOT invest in companies that do business with this regime," shouldn't require an overwhelming student turnout to have an impact.
Not only is this issue important, but it's one which affects us directly. No doubt most students on Grounds have been at least exposed to the ghastly history of the genocide currently raging in Sudan and the unspeakable atrocities that are continuing unabated. Much ink has been spilled, many words have been spoken on Grounds about the situation, yet over the talk and education there hangs a heavy cloud of impotence, as there seems to be so little we can do as individuals.
Although there was a time in history when ordinary citizens were powerless to act in the face of murderous governments, an age of globalization has made us all international consumers, and our consumer power has the potential for massive change. The Sudanese regime depends on the economic involvement of companies that either fund the development of oil production, or invest in projects that benefit the northern areas surrounding Khartoum. According to former Sudanese Transportation Minister Lam Akol, quoted by Stanford's Students Taking Action Now: Darfur, about 80 percent of government oil revenues are used to buy weapons for the Sudanese military, putting these companies in a position of quite literally exchanging blood for oil. As clients of these companies, we have the power to act.
In just one example, the issue of divestment cuts close to home for University students, and not just in the figure of speech sort of way. The fire protection systems in the University's dorms are run by Siemens, which is deeply involved with infrastructure development and improvement on college campuses throughout the nation. According to DivestSudan, a national campaign affiliated with DivestTerror, Siemens has signed contracts totaling more than $180 billion with the Sudanese government and has been involved in at least five projects there in the past six years. It seems cruel irony that the very company protecting us as students is spending our money in such devastating ways.
Divestment makes a difference. The South Africa model of the 1980s proved that a grassroots divestment movement can have broad consequences for a criminal country oceans away, and divestment movements can have similar effects on the murderous actions of the Sudanese government today. Look north for an example, where pressure from Canadian citizens forced Talisman Energy, the country's biggest private oil company, to exit Sudan and sell off their oil holdings there. And this summer, Stanford's board of trustees voted unanimously to divest the school's endowment's direct holdings in companies like PetroChina, Sinopec, ABB Ltd. and Tatneft, which do business with the Sudanese government.
It is disappointing but unsurprising that so few students voted for such an important referendum. The efforts of the University's Students Taking Action Now: Darfur were noble, but they are, of course, only a single group of students, and it is hard to condemn the apathy of, for example, 91 percent of the College student body towards a ballot that featured a single, uncontested student election. Yet demonstrated student action needn't be the only impetus for those that make the financial decisions for the University to do so ethically.
Following the Stanford decision, the university's president, John Hennessy, announced that "it was clear that the genocide occurring in Darfur, which appears to be at least partly enabled by these four companies, is in direct opposition to Stanford University's principles," and clearly it is opposition to the principles of Mr. Jefferson's University, as well. It shouldn't require students for the powers that be to recognize.
Granted, 87 percent of 8.5 percent isn't a particularly impressive calculation, so perhaps we'll see a return of the issue to the much more high profile and representative student elections in the spring.But an estimated five hundred people continue to die each day in southern Sudan, and many more are displaced each week. Multiply five hundred by the number of days of passivity until we vote again next semester, and justifying inaction by the product of 87 percent of 8.5 percent becomes cruel calculus, indeed.
Katie Cristol's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at kcristol@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
RASHID: Club exclusivity hurts the student body
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | 2 days agoWe need to reconsider how we think about extracurriculars — this hyper-competitive and exclusive culture which implicitly frames clubs as resume-padders must be stopped.
EDITORIAL: Reckon consistently with our history
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoUntil these bureaucracies have proven willing to commit to change outright, it is up to us, students and Charlottesville residents, to continue pushing for that change.
ELJAZZAR: Expand institutional knowledge for student empowerment
By Farah Eljazzar | 3 days agoThe University must take steps to provide its students with the means to easily navigate the resources, offices and structures of the institution.
