Amherst College rejects calls for divestment from corporations supplying military equipment to Israel

Amherst College’s board of trustees recently decided not to divest in companies that could be supplying military equipment to Israel in its ongoing war in Gaza. College leaders, including President Michael Elliott, explained their decision in a letter to the campus community. GAZETTE FILE PHOTO
Published: 06-27-2024 4:46 PM |
AMHERST — Trustees for Amherst College are rejecting appeals from faculty, students and alumni to divest from corporations that could be supplying military equipment to Israel in its ongoing war in Gaza.
Citing “significant disagreements” over the divestment appeals and the possibility of compromising the college’s ongoing operations, Amherst College officials posted a letter online Monday titled “Decisions Concerning Formal Divestment Resolutions,” signed by President Michael A. Elliott; Andrew J. Nussbaum, who chairs the trustees; and Chantal E. Kordula, the chair-elect for the trustees, stating that they will not heed formal calls for divestment from the Faculty Senate and the Amherst Association of Amherst Students.
“Guided by the fundamental principle of respecting the diversity of opinion in our community and noting the practical challenges, the board has decided unanimously not to pursue the divestment actions requested in the faculty and AAS resolutions,” the letter reads.
“To be very clear, the board’s position is neither an endorsement of Israel’s campaign in Gaza nor a statement in support of violence rather than peace,” the letter continues. “It is, instead, a carefully considered response to the demand that the institution adopt a defined position on global events that are of intense interest to many at Amherst, events subject to ongoing debate and disagreement whose outcome will be shaped not by our investment decisions but by the decisions of governments across the world.”
In May, the Amherst College Faculty & Staff for Justice in Palestine became the third faculty organization in the country to endorse divestment through a full vote, following the faculty senates at Pomona and the University of Michigan. Leaders of the group said the decision by the trustees is troubling.
“We are profoundly disappointed by the lack of moral courage on display in the trustees’ decision to reject the call of faculty, students and alumni to divest Amherst College’s endowment from companies profiting from Israel’s ongoing siege of Gaza,” wrote Christopher T. Dole, a professor of anthropology.
“Their statement justifying inaction in the face of deepening atrocities committed by Israel against Palestinians repeats the same justifications offered in a statement they released in December, rejecting our earlier call for divestment.”
At that time, 60 faculty members signed a letter calling for divestment from companies that could be making money off the Israel-Hamas war. The faculty group later cited statistics in its appeal, noting that nearly 35,000 Palestinians — including 14,500 children — in Gaza were killed by the Israeli military as of May 1.
Article continues after...
Yesterday's Most Read Articles






“Since that statement, the faculty deliberated and voted on a resolution calling for the college to divest from companies supporting Israel’s campaign in Gaza. (Sixty-four percent) of the faculty supported the resolution,” Dole wrote.
In addition, he pointed to the student senate passing a similar resolution by a vote of 23-1.
“Despite the collective voice of faculty, students and alumni calling for divestment, the trustees have once again made the choice to do nothing,” Dole wrote. “We continue to feel strongly that profiting from the death of Palestinian civilians goes against the values of our institution and, therefore, our work will continue.”
The decision was announced a few weeks after pro-Palestinian protesters disrupted events at the college’s reunion weekend.
Amherst Alumni for Palestine, which took credit for those interruptions, issued a statement that it was both “unsurprised and undeterred” by the statement from trustees, who it said has been “swayed by a powerful minority of students, faculty, and alumni who support that genocide,” and that apparently not enough has yet been done to disrupt Amherst College’s operations so that divestment will happen.
“We take the trustees’ statement as an invitation to renew our commitment to the hard work of building the power necessary to force Amherst College to end its complicity in genocide against Palestinians and in all other forms of racism and oppression,” the organization said.
The letter from Elliott and the trustees referenced the requests and resolutions from those associated with the college, including meetings with trustees, as well as a letter alumni printed in the Amherst Student newspaper.
“We recognize that the request for divestment reflects a deep concern for the human suffering, death, and destruction being endured by Palestinians in Gaza, and that those who support divestment perceive it as a clear moral statement about the actions of a foreign state, Israel. The trustees also appreciate that the faculty and student resolutions were considered through respectful, deliberative processes. At the same time, there are dissenting opinions, also strongly held, among a large number of students, faculty, staff and alumni.”
But the letter cites both principles and practicalities entailed in the trustees’ requirement to act as a fiduciary — a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of the college for both the short and long term. It noted that the endowment directly supports 56% of the college’s annual operating budget.
While those pushing for divestment have pointed to the college doing so as related to apartheid in South Africa and genocide in Sudan, the college said at those times there was clear agreement in the community and consensus of the federal government and international organizations.
However, “with regard to divestment related to Israel’s campaign in Gaza, perspectives in the Amherst community are both deeply held and extremely polarized.”
The letter also notes that the decision will disappoint and anger many in the college community, but that conversation will continue.
“We expect that this particular dialogue will take the form of continued activism and protest, and the college will continue to protect that criticism, so long as it does not cross the line into harassment or hate and does not directly interfere with core instructional and administrative functions of the college. While our disagreements may be intense, resolute, and personally felt, we owe it to each other as fellow members of a community to listen and respond with respect.”
Scott Merzbach can be reached at smerzbach@gazettenet.com.