Princeton Israeli Apartheid Divest (PIAD), a group of University students, alumni, faculty, staff, and community members, submitted a proposal to the University in June to divest and dissociate from companies and holdings with ties to Israel in response to Israel’s actions in the Israel-Hamas war.
The Resources Committee of the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) will be the first to review the document. PAW spoke with academic experts to explore PIAD’s 66-page proposal, what it would take logistically should Princeton choose to adopt it, and the odds of it happening.
What is the petition calling for?
PIAD wants Princeton to divest from entities that “enable or facilitate human rights violations or violations of international law as part of Israel’s illegal occupations, apartheid practices, and plausible acts of genocide.” PIAD suggests the following criteria for determining which companies would be included: those involved with settlement construction; companies that are engaging in “exploitation of natural resources” such as drilling for water, oil, or natural gas; those that build or maintain walls, checkpoints, or surveillance of Gaza and the West Bank; weapons and military equipment manufacturers and suppliers; those who discriminate between Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel; those involved in financing any of the preceding criteria; and any companies that operate in Israel or contribute to its economy.
Chris Marsicano, an assistant professor of education studies at Davidson College who specializes in education policy issues, said broad criteria like the last point are very unlikely to gain serious consideration because they include companies with no connection to the Israeli war effort.
The petition includes a list of 129 companies that would fall under at least one of its criteria, though the authors note the list may be inaccurate or incomplete as Princeton does not disclose its holdings in full, and the University declined to comment on the list when asked by PAW.
What is the history of this campaign at Princeton?
Princeton University community members originally petitioned to divest from companies with ties to Israel in 2002. In 2014, the Resources Committee rejected a similar petition. In 2015, graduate students voted to support divestment. In 2022, undergraduates organized a referendum to boycott the construction equipment company Caterpillar due to its role in the demolition of Palestinian homes and construction of settlements in the area; though the referendum passed, the Undergraduate Student Government ultimately declined to pursue the boycott due to an issue with counting abstentions.
Since Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel and the ensuing war, pro-Palestinian protesters in the community have renewed divestment demands.
What criteria are considered for divestment decisions at Princeton?
According to a set of guidelines established by the trustees in 1997, there is “a strong presumption against the University as an institution taking a position or playing an active role with respect to external issues of a political, economic, social, moral, or legal character.” For a divestment proposal to be successful, it must meet the following criteria:
- Considerable, thoughtful, and sustained campus interest;
- A central University value is at stake;
- The University community reaches a consensus on how the University should respond.
Is there consensus supporting the current petition?
One of the Resources Committee’s criteria for considering divestment is that the University community reaches a consensus on the issue. There are more than 100,000 alumni, faculty, staff, and students; more than 1,000 community members signed the petition, as well as 32 campus groups.
Many Princetonians oppose the petition, including the student boards for Chabad and Yavneh — two Jewish student groups — both of which submitted letters of opposition to the Resources Committee. A letter of opposition had more than 1,000 signatures as of Aug. 19.
Yonah Berenson ’25, president of Princeton’s Yavneh chapter, wrote in an email to PAW that “the criterion of consensus hasn’t been met by a long shot.”
At the April 2024 meeting of the CPUC, Resources Committee chair Jay Groves, who is also the Hugh Stott Taylor Chair of Chemistry, clarified that unanimous consensus is not required for divestment, but the committee has the sense that “we’ll know [consensus] when we see it.”
Is it technically feasible for Princeton to divest from the companies identified in the petition?
Marsicano told PAW, “This list of companies may come to Princeton, and Princeton [can] say, ‘We’re not invested in any of these.’”
However, if that is not the case, Todd Ely, an associate professor in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver and an expert in financial management and policies, said it can be “a slippery slope” to determine which businesses have connections to Israel. Due to our global economy, “most companies are going to have some footprint in Israel,” meaning that identifying companies of concern would require “due diligence and fact finding to understand what those companies are actually doing and whether or not that meets the criteria for problematic engagement in Israel.”
In addition, Ely said, it’s relatively simple to divest from direct holdings, but things get complicated and time consuming when universities attempt to divest from “companies that are public or private companies within holdings, managed by external parties, and blended with other institutional investors’ funds.”
Are petitions to divest from Israeli businesses likely to be successful?
Several prominent schools are facing similar divestment campaigns, such as Brown University, Johns Hopkins University, and Harvard University. At Brown, the highest governing body committed to vote on the issue in October 2024.
In Marsicano’s opinion, “If any school is going to be successful in its divestment efforts, it’s going to be Brown [University] … because they went after a very targeted [list of companies],” which he said “makes it easy to identify each of those companies one by one and make a decision.”
Who makes divestment decisions for the University?
The Board of Trustees ultimately makes the final decision on any calls for divestment, and Princeton Investment Co.(Princo) implements the board’s directives. The Trustees have charged the CPUC Resources Committee with considering “issues related to the University’s endowment portfolio, including concerns related to investment responsibility and socially responsible investments,” according to the CPUC Charter.
The committee, chaired by Groves, includes members of the faculty and staff and undergraduate and graduate students. Representatives from Princo and the Office of Finance and Treasury sit with the committee.
What is the process to divest at Princeton?
If the above criteria are met, the Resources Committee will review the endowment portfolio to determine which specific companies represent “a direct and serious contradiction of the central value” involved. Princeton may communicate with those businesses and monitor for improvement.
The Resources Committee will make a recommendation to the trustees, who have the final say.
How long does a petition for divestment take at Princeton?
According to the CPUC Resources Committee website, “There is no specific timeline for reviewing and evaluating issues brought to the Committee,” but “given the guidelines requirement of sustained interest, most proposals will take more than one academic year to reach a conclusion.”
At the April 2024 CPUC meeting, President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 said that decisions around divestment “can and likely will” take a long time.
When has Princeton divested in the past?
Princeton University has divested three times: from selected companies conducting business in South Africa in 1987, during apartheid; from companies supporting genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan in 2006; and from publicly traded fossil fuel companies in 2022.
What is the difference between divestment and disassociation?
Divestment entails the sale of all financial assets — both direct and indirect — associated with a company. The University also pledges not to repurchase those assets.
Dissociation goes one step further, in that Princeton will no longer accept gifts or grants from that company, purchase their products, or form new partnerships “that depend upon the exchange of money,” according to the University.
Does divestment tend to have an effect on the cause in question?
Ely told PAW divestment “is much more of a symbolic act and [meant to] draw attention” because even though university endowments can be large, “they tend not to move the market on a day-to-day basis.” He believes the “likelihood of [divestment] actually leading to thoughtful change within that company is unlikely, and any impacts on the stock price are likely short term, and quite limited.”
Widespread divestment efforts can have more wide-ranging effects. Ely cited the wave of college divestments from South Africa during apartheid as a success story. Even though “it’s unclear the role divestment activity played, the attention that was drawn to the issue through college and university campuses across the United States undoubtedly was a powerful piece of the effort to bring about change.”
Do college endowments tend to suffer after divestment?
Ely said that research has generally shown “that the investment performance is not significantly impacted in a negative manner by divestment activity.” However, Ely pointed out that “it’s very difficult to capture the costs of the labor and effort and attention spent” tweaking investment strategies. “To accommodate specific divestment demands will definitely take time, effort, and likely add additional costs.”