Australian University's Shocking Investment: Profiting from Tragedy in Gaza
A Disturbing Revelation: The Australian National University (ANU) has found itself in the midst of a scandal after purchasing shares in an Israeli weapons manufacturer, Elbit Systems, despite its promise to steer clear of controversial arms investments. This move has sparked outrage and raised questions about the university's commitment to ethical practices.
In March, ANU acquired shares worth $138,000 in Elbit Systems, just 12 days after Israel launched airstrikes in Gaza, resulting in over 400 deaths. Elbit Systems, the primary contractor for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), boasts of being the backbone of the IDF's drone fleet, which played a significant role in the Gaza assault. This investment decision is particularly shocking given the timing and the company's involvement in the conflict.
But here's where it gets controversial: ANU's investment reports reveal that they bought 225 shares in Elbit Systems, which were later sold in May. Interestingly, the share price increased during this period, suggesting a potential profit for the university. This raises the question: Did ANU profit from a tragedy?
The value of Elbit Systems shares has soared due to the demand for its weapons and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Tragically, in April 2024, an Australian aid worker, Zomi Frankcom, lost her life in Gaza due to an Israeli drone strike, which was later identified as an Elbit Systems Hermes 450 drone.
In response to pro-Palestine activism, ANU amended its investment principles to exclude controversial weapons companies, but this change seemingly failed to deter the university from investing in Elbit Systems. The company's deep connections with the Australian military and the government's wealth fund further complicate the matter.
Moreover, ANU increased its investment in another weapons company, Thales, significantly boosting the value of its holdings. The university claims to rely on external fund managers and proxy advisory firms, who have classified Thales as a 'green' investment. However, this classification is questionable, given Thales' involvement in the weapons industry.
ANU's spokesperson defended the university's actions, stating that neither the asset manager nor their controversial weapons information provider flagged Elbit Systems as controversial. But this explanation has done little to quell the controversy.
The Ethical Dilemma: Governments and institutions are under scrutiny for their investments in Israeli weapons companies, especially after a UN inquiry found evidence of genocide in Gaza. Chris Sidoti, a former inquiry member, condemned Elbit Systems' role in enabling war crimes and urged entities to cease dealings with the company. The ANU's investment has been labeled as 'stupid' and 'disgraceful' by various critics, including union representatives and politicians.
And this is the part most people miss: While ANU's investment policy aims to promote social good, its actions seem to contradict this objective. The university's decision to invest in weapons manufacturers, despite public pressure and ethical concerns, has sparked a debate about the role of educational institutions in promoting peace and social responsibility.
What do you think? Should universities be held to a higher standard when it comes to ethical investments? Is ANU's defense of its actions justified, or does it highlight a deeper issue within the institution's investment practices? Share your thoughts and join the conversation!
