Letter to the Editor
Profit from genocide
Published Sunday, March 23, 2008
March 15, 2008
To the editor:
Do you know that the Permanent Fund Corp. is investing your money to profit from the genocide in Darfur? Fortunately there are two bills in the Legislature, HB 287 and SB 227, which ask for targeted divestment from foreign companies that support the Khartoum government.
Twenty-four states have already passed similar divestment legislation.
Since 2003 the Sudanese government and paramilitary groups have killed over 200,000 of their own citizens, and jeopardized the lives of 2 million others through displacement. Recognizing these atrocities, President Bush signed and Congress unanimously passed legislation that authorizes state and local governments to divest from companies that support the Khartoum government and prohibits federal contracts with those companies.
So why is this legislation being blocked in Juneau? Because the Permanent Fund mangers testified against this bill on the basis that it would be too difficult and the fund might not earn as much money.
These bills would have no material financial impact on the Permanent Fund, as less than .05 percent of the portfolio is invested in these foreign companies. But even if it were more, do we really value a few extra dollars that much? I do not and I believe neither do most Alaskans.
Please contact your representatives today and let them know that you value human life over dollars. Also contact Sen. Lesil McGuire, (800) 365-2995, and request that she schedule a hearing on SB 227 in the Senate State Affairs Committee.
Do we want to tell our children and grandchildren that we didn’t stop genocide but we did make a profit?
Comments
Can you please give me more information, specifically which foreign companies? I need credible information before I can help you. Thank you.
Like Candicane asked, which foreign companies and/or how is the PFD fund investing money to profit from this genocide?
Janet- Do you really believe that the PFD Board of Directors intentionally invested our money in foreign companies knowingly involved with the conflict in Darfur solely to make a profit? Since you "intentionally" ommited any verifiable information from your letter to back up your claims, I assume you're just another person who reads a tidbit from the cover of a supermarket tabloid and takes it for Gospel.
Here's a link to an adn story about this from 3/3/08. Note that Sinopec is the large Chinese oil company that also wanted to get involved with Alaska's gas line.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/333...
The following I copy/pasted from this adn story:
More than $22 million in investments
Permanent Fund stocks subject to Sudan divestment under HB 287:
Company Market value
Sinopec (China) $10.5 million
Alstom (France) $9.3 million
Petrofac (United Kingdom) $1.3 million
Wartsila (Finland) $868,000
Lundin Petroleum (Sweden) $68,000
CNPC (Hong Kong) $26,000
Note: Values as of Dec. 31, 2007
Sources: Alaska Legislative Research Services, Alaska Permanent Fund Corp.
This is from the Anchorage Daily News, March 5:
"Federal executive orders forbid U.S. companies from operating in Sudan, but the Permanent Fund owns shares in six foreign companies that do. The biggest stock holding is Sinopec [$10.5 million], a giant Chinese oil company that last year backed an unsuccessful bid from an Anchorage construction company for a state natural gas pipeline license."
Here are the other companies (from the same story):
Alstom (France) $9.3 million
Petrofac (United Kingdom) $1.3 million
Wartsila (Finland) $868,000
Lundin Petroleum (Sweden) $68,000
CNPC (Hong Kong) $26,000
candikane: Ms. Schichnes is not asking you to help HER, and anyone who follows the news should know that what she's saying is credible.
Starman and gregg228: The letter does not claim that the companies or the PFD managers are intentionally profiting from the genocide in Darfur. The letter supports ending our investment in companies that do business with the Sudanese government. The Sudanese government supports the militias that have killed hundreds of thousands of civilians since 2003. The question here is whether we Alaskans want to have a business relationship with that government.
Read the letter again. It's a lot more sensible than your responses.
Anyone interested in Alaska's PFD investments in Sudan can check this link:
http://www.sudandivestment.org/campaigns...
The site has links to numerous ADN, Juneau Empire, and KTUU stories on this issue, as well as articles from a few other sources. Navigate a bit and make up your own minds. I don't see any significant loss coming from PFD managers divesting. However, the gain, in terms of moral prestige would be significant.
This is not a mere case of political differences with another nation. There has been an ongoing genocide in Sudan. Every time this happens, we all say "never again." But when it happens again, we all find another set of reasons not to act. When do we stand up for our values?
Mr. Dickson - There is another letter on this page that describes quite well why candikane and others may choose not to follow the television news with regularity. There are also those that cannot afford newspapers, are new to being able to afford the internet and perhaps their only news information comes from the radio on the way to work. It's nice to see you condescend to someone who is just asking for further information.
Beyond that, to say that everything you hear/read on/in the news is credible, or everything that you read in a short letter-to-the-editor is credible, is an assumption at best. I believe that is why the first two posts asked for further FACTS from those who may know where to direct them.
So, thank you all for offering further facts. It is appreciated, will be looked into and if warranted, a call to the proper people will be in order.
I see frustration in Ian Dickson's comment, not condescension. Being unable to afford a newspaper or the Internet is not a good reason to believe everything you hear.
... which is why, I guess, its good that people ask for further information.
Ian_Dickson: Your response in unnecessarily rude. I read this and was unfamiliar with the claim. It sounded like something I should do more about if it is in fact the case. My intent was to circumvent a ridiculous fact finding mission on my part when it appeared the author of the letter may have already had the information I wanted. I don't claim to know everything, and I'm sorry I got your panties in a bunch by writing HER when maybe I should have written THE SUDANESE? But thank you for saying that my attempt to collect more information over something that I would absolutely support the moment I discern it to be credible is not sensible. Way to alienate people.
Nonpartison: Thank you. I will look at the site you posted.
critical_reader: Thank you to you, too. I will also follow the link you provided.
candikane: I'm sorry, you're right. I think I let my anger at Starman affect the way that I read your and gregg's comments. I thought that Ms. Schnichnes had written an excellent letter that included everything a reader needed to carry on, if they so desired. For future reference, if you have the number of a house or senate bill, there's a good chance that the state's newspapers have written about the bill and the associated issue. Just do a google search on the bill number with a relevant keyword of two. Example: sb 227 sudan alaska. In this case, it took maybe two or three minutes to find what I was looking for.
Ms. VanDam, nobody said that everything one reads in the news is credible. However, any competent critical thinker should be able to tell that Ms. Schniches is not a crackpot. She has the names of the house and senate bills, she offers verifiable background info, and she keeps the emotional aspect of her appeal to a minimum. Also, she has absolutely nothing to gain from this.
That doesn't mean that one should just bow down and do what she says, but it does mean that she has done her job, and the onus is on the reader to find out more if the reader wants to. Certainly there is nothing in her letter to justify dismissing her as someone "who reads a tidbit from the cover of a supermarket tabloid and takes it for Gospel," as Starman did.
Mr. Dickson, in all fairness, you're right. I was reading her letter with tired eyes last night. I've worked 6 of 7 days the last two weeks and was popping on here while doing the whole Easter thing *wink* for my kiddos last night. This is the first year since being back in Alaska that my family will be eligible for dividends and I guess I just haven't been paying very close attention. We just got cable within the last month and this computer about a week ago and I find myself trying to eat everything up all at once having been very limited in the information I was able to receive and feeling very much out of the loop. That being said, I went back and read all your comments on this site before I replied to your last comment and feel safe in saying that you seem to be an intelligent person with valuable opinions and no apparent history of striking out at people for the sake of striking out (I think that alone is why I took offense at being singled out). I will absolutely pay attention to future comments of yours that I stumble upon. I appreciate your apology, and please accept mine for my aggressively defensive tone.
Thank you Janet... hope this helps.
From Alaska Permanent Fund Corportation’s Corporate Policy Manual:
“Policies and Guidelines for Asset Classes. …the Board will periodically review the asset investment policies and guidelines set out in those resolutions to determine whether they (a) continue to reflect applicable law….”
http://www.apfc.org/iceimages/investment... (pp. 9-10)
What the Federal Government has done:
S. 2271: Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007
“Section 3 -
Expresses the sense of Congress that the U.S. government should support a state or local government decision to divest from or prohibit the investment of state or local assets in a person determined to pose a financial or reputational risk.
Authorizes a state or local government to divest state or local assets or prohibit investment of state or local assets in persons that are conducting or have direct investments in business operations in Sudan that include power production activities, mineral extraction activities, oil-related activities, or the production of military equipment….”
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd...
What our money funds:
"The Sudanese government's disastrous decision to arm, direct, and pay Northern Arab tribes, now called the Janjaweed, as their proxies in the war against Darfur's rebels led to genocide and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and the destruction of their villages and livelihoods," the president's special envoy to Sudan told Congress last year.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/333...
The amount we contribute:
Of the $37 billion encompassed in the Alaska Permanent Fund, only $22 million (.06% the value of the fund) dispersed across 6 Highest Offenders is subject to divestment.
http://www.sudandivestment.org/campaigns...
This breaks down to:
Roughly 99 cents per person based on $1654 dividend from last year (.06% of $1654). That’s $598,107.51 (rough projection) collectively.
http://www.pfd.alaska.gov/forms/2007Form...
...feel free to correct me if my math is flawed ;)
MY SOLUTION:
If lawmakers and the PFD board refuse to divest funds, I suggest we collectively take our dollars and contribute them to HELPSudan http://www.helpsudaninternational.org/ab.... Maybe if lawmakers know we’ll take our $598,107.51 out of Alaska’s economy, they’ll listen.
I am a member of Save Darfur Anchorage. We initiated the state divestment campaign. Janet laid out the basics wonderfully. Here are a few more details to supplement her informative letter:
If the targeted divestment legislation is signed into law. The Permanent Fund would have 90 days to create a list of "scrutinized companies." The PF managers can use existing FREE lists from the Sudan Divestment Task Force (SDTF) or any of the other 24 states that have already implemented Sudan divestment policies, or the PF can create its own.
The PF managers would then review our existing investments. Identify our holdings in companies on the list and, when found, submit letters of engagement to these companies. Templates for these letters and all mailing information can be obtained for free from the SDTF. The letters simply notify the company that the holdings will be sold because of their complicity in the Darfur Genocide unless the company stops its active business operations in Sudan.
If 90 days pass and these companies don't stop their operations, Alaska fund managers must begin the divestment of certain types of funds immediately. Depending on the type of fund and who manages it, the Permanent Fund Corporation will have 18 months (from the day the law is signed) to divest our holdings in these targeted companies. This allows the PF managers plenty of time to find a decent market so that profits will not have to be sacrificed.
Genocide is costly. The GOS, because of its external debt of almost $26 billion, is too broke to develop its own resources and is also ineligible to get additional loans from entities such as the World Bank until they pay off what they owe in arrears. The GOS, therefore, has to rely on foreign direst investment for money. About 70% of the export revenue provided by companies in the oil, power, and mining sectors is funneled into the government's military and janjaweed militia. These sectors provide at least 90% of the country's total export revenue.
The goal is to get these companies to stop providing money to the GOS, or at the very least, to get them to demand that the GOS return stability to the Darfur region.
Our links to the genocide are more straight forward than some realize. Two of the targeted companies that we have holdings in are Sinopec and CNPC Hong Kong. The Government of China is the majority shareholder in both of these companies. China is also, according to a recent report by Human Rights First, the leading small arms dealer to the Government of Sudan. China has provided approximately 90 percent of the Sudanese government’s assault rifles, machine guns, and the like since 2004. Between 2003 and 2006 China sold $55 million dollars worth of small arms to the government of Sudan.
Check out http://savedarfur-ak.blogspot.com for more information about the legislation and the Save Darfur campaign in Alaska.
Awesome! Thank you kelleynixon.
I find it funny that so many are begging the US to go to war in Darfur yet demanding that we leave Iraq. You can't justifiy it either as there was genocide and murder going on in Pre-war Iraq as well. Look up the numbers and facts before you start asking for us to enter into another war that you aren't going to be happy about in a couple of years.
I know the United States company Freeport McMoRan profits from the genocide in West Papua; as does Bechtel Inc. and the rest of the members of the US Indonesia Society (USINDO.org)
This was the reason John F Kennedy was in 1962 manipulated into creating the New York Agreement trading West Papua to Indonesian military occupation, by McGeorge Bundy working on advice of Freeport director & Cold War architect Robert Lovett, wasn't it?
Genocide is profitable, billions upon billions of dollars each year.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.