Letter to the Editor: Divestment

It was no surprise that the Principal’s Review Committee for Responsible Investing ruled against divesting from companies operating with or in the state of Israel because “responsible investing” was defined as making the biggest profit with the least risk. Nevertheless, even within that biased definition, the committee’s choice was the wrong one since investing in any company connected to Israel is very risky given the conflict in the area. The committee also had to follow Queen’s requirement of “institutional neutrality” which was defined as not promoting  “political views.” However, the Jewish community at Queen’s and in Kingston celebrated Queen’s decision as a “huge victory […] for the Jewish community at large”  because they know that maintaining the status quo is not “institutional neutrality” but a vindication of Israel’s actions. Even though the fix was in, Queen’s could have done a better job of making Queen’s investments less risky and coming up with a solution which was not so one-sided. It certainly was not institutionally neutral.