Conservatives Urge Sale of USSR Stock

At Harvard, "Divestment" is a word almost automatically associated with liberal activists, large rallies and South Africa. But some normally quiet conservatives are out to change that.

In recent opinion articles and organizational efforts, some students have sought to emphasize what they call the moral repugnancy of the Soviet Union and have urged Harvard to sever its economic ties with the country.

Administrators have opposed total divestment of stock in companies operating in unpopular nations because of the political stance and the economic loss such a move requires. But they now face two separate groups of students and faculty who are urging Harvard to use its $2.5 billion endowment to take a moral stand in two countries.

The conservatives say Harvard has long given special attention to South Africa, using "intensive dialogue" to help improve a company's operation in the country and selectively divesting of companies that have been especially unresponsive in helping to institute reforms for Blacks.

They are calling for similar treatment for a nation they say is clearly less deserving of the benefits of American capital and the implicit support by Harvard--through unchecked investment--of companies that operate in the Soviet Union.

National Interest

"It is difficult to agree with the broad divestment movement on campus... We think that investments in South Africa are positive for the people there, whereas in the case of the Soviet Union, selling goods is not in our national interest," said Mark P. Lagon '86, president of the Republican Club.

Thomas A. Firestone '86, editor of the Harvard Salient, wrote an editorial in the latest issue of the conservative magazine criticizing Harvard for emphasizing South Africa over the Soviet Union.

"I don't want mass demonstrations. All the 'Hey, Ho, Derck Bok' stuff is just absurd. But I would like to address the administration directly and with well-articulated arguments," he said.

"I would like to present [President Derck C.J Bok with a list of companies that operate there so he can take some action," he added.

Lagon said he has organized a forum in conjunction with the Democratic Club to help publicize Soviet abuses in Afghanistan, and to encourage Harvard students to become more involved in protests against the country.

Several professors have also joined the fray.

"If you adopt a policy of fighting morally repugnant nations, then the Soviet Union should be at the top of your list," said Baird Professor of History Richard Pipes, a specialist in Russian history who has written numerous recent articles on the need to divest.

"We must be consistent. You cannot be in favor of economic sanctions for one [evil] nation and not for another...With the genocide going on in Afganistan, I can't understand why Harvard has not targeted the Soviet Union," he said.

And, in a recent forum on South Africa, Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz said the abuses of Soviet Jews are equally repulsive as the abuses of Blacks in South Africa. He said he favors divestment from all reprehensible nations or no divestment at all.

"I would find it obnoxious to divest from South Africa but not from other countries," he said.

The largest single problem with the new activism is that American companies rarely advertise their sales to the Soviet government. In fact, only the State Department has a complete, confidential list of such companies, according to officials.

Has Been Considered

In a recent interview, President Bok said that monitoring investments in the Soviet Union would be useless compared with actions aimed at improving the ways companies deal with Blacks in South Africa.

But he said, "perhaps we should consider the issue" and did not rule out the possibility of subjecting companies operating in the Soviet Union to the same scrutiny applied to companies operating in South Africa. "I would like to think about it some more," he said.

In the past, Harvard's Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility has considered the issue of the Soviet Union, both in terms of a general policy and on shareholder proxy resolutions voted on each spring by Harvard and other large investors, according to ACSR Secretary Jane W. Sherwin.

She said, however, that the ACSR and the Corporation, to which the body makes its recommendations, have regularly voted against any proxy resolutions which would require taking some sort of political stand on the country.

"Harvard has determined that South Africa is a special case," she said