ANU's Controversial Investment in Elbit Systems: A Closer Look
The Australian National University (ANU) has sparked controversy by investing in Elbit Systems, a prominent Israeli weapons manufacturer, despite its earlier pledge to avoid controversial arms investments. This decision comes amidst ongoing tensions and a recent UN inquiry report accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.
In March, ANU purchased $138,000 worth of shares in Elbit Systems, just 12 days after Israel resumed its military offensive in Gaza, resulting in the deaths of over 400 people. Elbit Systems is the largest contractor to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and plays a crucial role in the IDF's drone fleet, which has been extensively used in the military assault on Gaza.
The investment was made despite ANU's commitment to avoid controversial weapons companies, including those linked to anti-personnel mines, cluster munitions, chemical weapons, biological weapons, and nuclear weapons. This contradiction has raised concerns among students, staff, and activists who have been advocating for divestment from weapons manufacturers.
ANU's spokesperson defended the investment, citing 'normal rebalancing' and the use of external fund managers who adhere to socially responsible investment policies. However, the university's position on Elbit Systems remains unclear, as it has not been flagged as a controversial investment by its asset manager or provider of controversial weapons information.
The value of Elbit Systems shares has skyrocketed due to increased demand for its weapons and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This investment has drawn criticism from various sources, including former inquiry member Chris Sidoti, who deemed it 'incredibly stupid' and difficult to justify. The National Tertiary Education Union's ACT secretary, Lachlan Clohesy, also criticized ANU's investment policy, stating that it is 'not fit for purpose.'
The Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi called the investment 'absolutely disgraceful,' emphasizing the university's responsibility to act in the best interest of its students and society. As the debate continues, ANU's decision raises important questions about the ethical boundaries of investment and the potential impact on global conflicts.
