On Tuesday, September 29, 2020, at 10 a.m. EST sharp, Columbia undergraduates learned via an all-school email that the referendum calling for divestment from companies that profit off Israeli apartheid and human rights abuses against Palestinians had, in fact, passed with a sizable margin.

This vote is nothing short of historic, given four years of pro-BDS advocacy and two prior unsuccessful attempts to introduce a BDS resolution. While Columbia is not the first college to pass divestment from companies supporting Israel’s occupation, it joins a growing list of U.S. colleges and universities, including the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, which passed a divestment referendum just last week. Columbia follows in the footsteps of Barnard College, where students in April 2018 voted overwhelmingly in favor of a similar divestment referendum.

Forty percent of eligible Columbia College voters, or 1771 undergraduate students, voted on the referendum, thus exceeding the 30 percent participation threshold. Of those who voted, 61 percent (1081) voted in favor, 27 percent (485) voted against it, and 12 percent (205) abstained. 

The referendum stated: “Should Columbia University divest its stocks, funds, and endowment from companies that profit from or engage in the State of Israel’s acts towards Palestinians, that according to Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), fall under the United Nations International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid?”

The Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD) campaign began in 2016, as a coalition of students from Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine and Columbia/Barnard Jewish Voice for Peace. They have since been trying not only to get divestment on the ballot, but to pass it. In the wake of the contentious vote, CUAD released a statement, and they have received attention among media outlets across the political spectrum, as well as among non-profits and NGOs dedicated to the fighting for Palestinian rights.

CUAD and allies’ work is far from over. Ultimately, the decision and responsibility to divest lies with the University’s Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Investing (ACSRI), which advises the University’s President and trustees. Soon after the results of the divestment vote were announced, the President released a statement, concluding that “altering our endowment in order to advance the interests of one side is not among the paths we will take.” The statement has a misleading title, calling the referendum the “College Student Vote on Israel” and thus obscuring the intent of the referendum. In the statement, Bollinger reiterates his refusal to support the referendum, as it would “contradict a long-held understanding that the University should not change its investment policies on the basis of particular views about a complex policy issue, especially when there is no consensus across the University community about that issue.” That issue is apartheid - an internationally recognized violation of international law and human rights norms.

However, historically there has been no such understanding or policy around the University’s investment policies, in the face of grave ethical issues. In 2017, the University’s board of trustees - and president - voted to divest from thermal coal producers. And in 1985, the University was the first major U.S. university to fully divest from South Africa - out of a recognition of apartheid and as a result of the national attention garnered by protests at Columbia and elsewhere. These decisions indicate that the University can and will, in fact, change its investment policies - and thus, divestment policies - on the basis of particular views.

Moreover, Bollinger believes it “unfair and inaccurate to single out this specific dispute for this purpose when there are so many other, comparably deeply entrenched conflicts around the world.” However, he himself singled out this issue in March 2020 and dangerously linked Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) and the divestment referendum to anti-Semitism on college campuses, though no evidence exists supporting that claim. Separately from the referendum, Bollinger has also recently opined on first amendment rights under a Trump administration, choosing to single out that issue and demonstrating the importance of respecting the right of free speech and discourse.