Faculty Discusses Handling Of S. Africa Investment Policy

More than half of the Faculty members who spoke yesterday at a special Faculty meeting on Harvard's handling of its South Africa-related investments said the University's policy lacks a defined objective and moral validity.

Five of the 11 speakers at the meeting said they have signed a letter, now circulating among the Faculty, that calls on the Corporation to follow a step-by-step plan to encourage corporate withdrawal from South Africa.

The final step recommended by the letter is the "strategic divestiture" of investments in corporations that refuse to withdraw or are substantially involved in South Africa.

The letter, which was circulated at the meeting, has already been signed by over 100 Faculty members, one of its authors said yesterday.

President Bok told the 150 Faculty members at the meeting that he does not believe divestiture would have a noticeable effect on the activities of corporations active in South Africa.

Many corporations, in fact, would welcome divestiture by shareholders critical of corporated practices in South Africa, Bok said.

Oscar Handlin, Pforzheimer University Professor, Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. '53, professor of Government, and Joseph F. Nye, professor of Government, supported the University's handling of its South Africa-related investments and opposed divestiture.

Stanley H. Hoffmann, professor of Government, opened the discussion by calling on the University to develop "an approach that is both tougher and less time-consuming."

Hoffmann said the Corporation's current policy of conducting a case-by-case review of corporations active in South Africa lacks "precise guidelines" and is "really a hopeless task."

Karl W. Deutsch, Stanfield Professor of International Peace, said the University should follow a procedure similar to the one proposed in the Faculty letter, because Harvard is perceived as "a flagship in the U.S. and the rest of the world."

But Nye disagreed that this procedure would effectively combat apartheid.

He said he would not sign the Faculty letter because he is uncertain that corporate withdrawal from South Africa would benefit blacks in that country.

Nye said withdrawal would be ineffective and could only offer a short-term symbolic effect. By withdrawal, the University would take the symbolism. "Wrap it up into one ball and shoot it at once," Nye added.

History, said he supports corporate withdrawal from South Africa because the corporations "materially support and reinforce the apartheid regime."

"In the sphere of public opinion Harvard is a whale," Bohstedt said, add- ing that by following its current investment policy Harvard is "like a whale trying to act like an ostrich, which looks foolish and evasive."

Wallace T. MacCaffrey, professor of History, said he believes some people "overestimate the effects" Harvard's divestiture would have on the opinions of the American people and on South Africa.

MacCaffrey said he approves of the current University policy of supporting the labor and employee guidelines known as the Sullivan Principles, because the guidelines represent "small but measurable actions, aiding black South Africans."

Handlin, however, said he opposes divestiture because he believes the mission of the University "is not to perfect an imperfect world, but to pursue and advance learning."

Tahi L. Mottl, assistant professor of Afro-American Studies, likened the conditions of black women in South Africa to the conditions of people living under slavery, and urged Bok to make "an unambiguous public statement" on South Africa. "A clear and succinct message from the President will have a tremendous impact" in South Africa, Mottl said.

Mansfield said he questions why Harvard concerns itself with the apartheid of South Africa and neglects the genocide and other immoral acts of such countries as Cambodia.

Mansfield said that while the American people and the South African people have both been guilty of crimes against black South Africans," he asked, is it "rational to limit your moral concern only to those acts you have committed?"

Peter M. Lange, associate professor of Government, and a signer of the Faculty letter, said yesterday he was pleased with the extent of the debate and the Faculty turnout, but added "these meetings always have an impact only over a long period of time."

Bok said at the close of the meeting he appreciated the "way we have tried to think together instead of simply castigating each other.