FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Didn't Fidelity already divest?

Earlier this year, Fidelity sold 91% of its NYSE PetroChina shares – but not shares listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. The Save Darfur Coalition believes this is a very positive step and confirms the importance of grassroots divestment work across the country. However, as of the most recently available filings Fidelity still held over half a billion dollars in PetroChina on the Hong Kong market. Although we are heartened by Fidelity’s step in the right direction, our efforts are ultimately only victorious when the genocide has ended. Next steps for Fidelity: Divest the Rest!

What is the targeted divestment strategy?

The Save Darfur Coalition uses the targeted divestment strategy that was pioneered by the Sudan Divestment Task Force and is used by virtually every organization involved in Sudan divestment work. Targeted divestment focuses on only “highest offending” companies. These companies are defined by the following criteria:

  • Having a significant business relationship that benefits the government of Sudan or a government-created project;
  • Imparting minimal benefit to the country's underprivileged; and
  • Having enacted no effective corporate governance policy regarding the Darfur genocide.

Only when a “highest offending” company refuses to change its behavior after a period of shareholder engagement are investors encouraged to divest from that company. Targeted divestment exempts certain companies, industries, and regions that provide benefit to underprivileged civilians.


How can divestment from Sudan help the people of Darfur?

In the case of Darfur, there are roughly two dozen companies that are considered to be “highest offenders.” These are mostly companies that work directly with the government of Sudan to support oil exploration in the country. As much as 70 percent of the oil revenue is used by the government to fund the military, fueling the genocide in Darfur, which has already taken approximately 400,000 lives.

Divestment creates pressure for these companies to stop direct or indirect funding of the genocide, either by pulling out of Sudan or pressuring the Government of Sudan to change its policies.

The divestment campaign also raises awareness of the genocide in Darfur and has the potential to increase political pressure for other strategies to help address the crisis, such as legislation, sanctions and diplomacy.

How do you know which companies in Sudan are the “highest offenders” in contributing to the genocide in Darfur?

The Save Darfur Coalition’s Divest for Darfur campaign is based on the highly respected research of the Sudan Divestment Task Force. The Sudan Divestment Task Force has screened and communicated with hundreds of companies in Sudan to identify the “highest offenders” based on the criteria they have developed to define the targeted divestment strategy.

The research of the Sudan Divestment Task Force is used not only by the Save Darfur Coalition but also by numerous states, universities, and investment managers involved in Sudan divestment. The research is updated regularly.

For a complete list of these companies and their role in contributing to the genocide, please contact the Sudan Divestment Task Force. They have extensive details on this and other research and policy issues on their website.

Is divestment really effective?

Divestment works because it creates an economic incentive for the government of Sudan to change.

The government of Sudan has shown in the past that it is responsive to economic pressure. Pressure on Sudan from China is particularly important, as China is Sudan’s primary trading and political partner. Any interruption in the flow of revenue would create problems funding the campaign of terror in Darfur. In addition, it would create a economic cost for the horrible atrocities being carried out in Darfur, thereby putting financial pressure on the Sudanese government to halt their campaign of genocide. A number of companies have already responded to the divestment movement and have altered their unacceptable behavior.

Will divestment hurt the people of Darfur?

The people of Darfur do not benefit from the current oil revenues or other investments by the worst offending companies. The revenues are used to harm them, not to help them. Targeted divestment focuses only on the “highest offending” companies. Companies providing food, medicine and health services in Sudan are exempted from scrutiny. The Darfuri community will only continue to suffer as long as oil revenues continue to fund the Sudanese government’s campaign of genocide.

What are the Save Darfur Coalition’s partners doing in regard to divestment?

Many of the Save Darfur Coalition’s partners have active divestment campaigns. The Sudan Divestment Task Force has initiated and led the Sudan divestment movement, including coordinating research and developing the targeted divestment strategy used by virtually all groups that work on divestment. The Task Force also leads the state and university divestment campaigns. The Fidelity Out Of Sudan campaign  initiated the divestment focus on Fidelity, because of Fidelity’s large holdings of PetroChina and Sinopec, and leads that campaign in partnership with the Save Darfur Coalition. Other coalition partners that work on divestment include the NAACP, American Jewish World Service and Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Does divestment have a financial cost, and is there a conflict between divestment and fiduciary responsibility?

For most individuals, organizations and investment companies, the only cost to divestment is the time it takes to set your divestment policy and implement it. Transaction fees for shifting investments are usually nominal.

Nineteen states and more than 50 colleges and universities, including Harvard, Yale, and the University of California, have determined that there is no conflict between targeted divestment from the “highest offending” companies and fiduciary responsibility. Yale noted that its returns have improved since divesting from their holdings in these companies. Others have noted that recent returns on alternative investments are comparable or even better.

In Vermont, the State Treasurer noted that investments in the “highest offending” companies also poses financial risk. Spaulding explained, “The Committee believed it would be prudent, from a fiduciary position, to refrain from owning securities in companies listed on the Sudan Divestment Task Force Highest Offenders list, because the value of our portfolio could suffer if we continue holding those securities while other investors take affirmative action to sell securities on the list.”

Further, for the typical fund or investor, the size of their investments in the “highest offending” companies doing business in Sudan is a very small percentage of their overall investment portfolio.

What is the Save Darfur Coalition’s position on divestment from Iran, North Korea and other states?

The Save Darfur Coalition does not take a position on issues that do not directly relate to the genocide in Darfur. For that reason, we have no involvement in divestment campaigns that relate to Iran, North Korea or other countries. We encourage lawmakers who care about Darfur to introduce and support legislation that specifically relates to the crisis in Darfur, including legislation supporting divestment from the “highest offending” companies in Sudan that finance the genocide.


Where do I get comprehensive information about Fidelity?

For more information about the Fidelity campaign, go to www.FidelityOutOfSudan.com.

Where do I get comprehensive information about divestment?

The Save Darfur Coalition’s Divest for Darfur campaign is based on the research, policy analysis, and targeted divestment strategy of our partner the Sudan Divestment Task Force. For more detailed information, additional questions, comprehensive research, and divestment policy analysis, please see their web site.