Frequently Asked Questions

What is the connection between U.S. investments and the genocide in Sudan?

Most U.S. companies are banned from doing business in Sudan but U.S. states, individuals, and institutions hold investments in companies operating in Sudan that are providing the government with the money and support it needs to fund the genocide. The United States realizes the connection between its investments and the genocide. This year, President Bush signed into law the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act, authorizing state divestment from Sudan and recognizing divestment as an effective way to pressure the government of Sudan to end the genocide.

Why should Nebraska pass targeted Sudan divestment legislation?

Nebraska was the first state to pass divestment legislation from South Africa during the apartheid, helping bring an end to the rights-repressive regime. Nebraska has a similar opportunity to make a difference in Darfur with the passage of a targeted Sudan divestment bill. Divesting Nebraska public monies from Sudan limits the Sudanese government’s ability to carry out the genocide and pressures the international community to contribute to the peacekeeping mission in Sudan.

What reason do we have to believe that divestment will make a difference in Darfur?

Political pressure and diplomacy have failed to end the killings in Darfur. There’s reason to believe that economic pressure will make a difference. The government of Sudan has responded to economic pressure in the past. In 1997, the United States imposed sanctions on Sudan for its support of terrorism, banning most U.S. companies from doing business in Sudan. In response, Sudan changed its terrorism policy, sharing intelligence with the United States and detaining Al Qaeda suspects. The government of Sudan has publically called for an end to divestment, placing a $1 million advertisement in the New York Times extolling the virtues of investing in Sudan, and issuing a press release and an op-ed condemning the divestment movement.

How many states divested from Sudan?

Twenty-seven states including our neighbors Colorado, Kansas, and Iowa have adopted divestment policies from Sudan. Ninteen of these states passed legislation nearly identical to Nebraska’s bill. For a complete list of divested state’s visit http://www.sudandivestment.org/statistics.asp.

Could divestment hurt the people of Darfur?

Companies that provide benefit to the citizens of Sudan, such as agricultural and health related companies are excluded from divestment.
The legislation would require Nebraska’s public pension funds to divest from companies that meet three criteria:
1.They must have a business relationship with the government or government-created project,
2. They must impart minimal benefit to the country's underprivileged, and
3. They must have demonstrated no substantial corporate governance policy regarding the Darfur situation.

Will divesting hurt Nebraska financially?

No. The legislation contains safeguards that protect the state's pension funds and allows Nebraska to maintain its prudent investor responsibilities. Furthermore, the number of companies considered for divestment will be a very small percentage of Nebraska’s investment portfolio. Our state has the opportunity to invest in equally profitable genocide-free companies.