Will maximising investment returns override ethics? That is the question the tertiary sector posed to UniSaver, the academic equivalent of KiwiSaver, now revealed to invest in Israeli weapons and military intelligence.

In 2024, some 400 university staff appealed to UniSaver to divest from such companies.

The fund initially ignored the call.

The fund issued a statement in September 2025 emphasising its fiduciary duty to ensure best performance, arguing divestment was unnecessary because the New Zealand government had not imposed sanctions against Israel, and noting its Israel-linked exposure is only 0.11 percent of total assets.

After a November open letter signed by 715 staff, nearly double the earlier number, UniSaver agreed to meet representatives of the group.

What should the tenor of those discussions be?

And why should any of this matter to the average New Zealander returning from the summer lull, facing a new year that looks uncomfortably like the last, with no sign from the Prime Minister’s State of the Nation last weekend that domestic pressures will ease?

The core question
This is the core question: with so many local concerns, why should the Israel–Palestine conflict matter?

Or, more pointedly, why should 0.11 percent of a pension fund belonging to a relatively privileged cohort matter to those worried about jobs, the cost of living, and healthcare?

Global issues are closer than we think. The suffering of Gazans and the anxieties of New Zealanders share a root: public policy framed as instrumental and amoral, where the wellbeing of persons is sacrificed to detached abstractions of markets and efficiencies while morality and integrity are treated as incidental.

These attitudes yield the same harvest everywhere: dehumanisation, insecurity, and the corrosion of civic trust.

Our only defence is a moral standpoint that declares “thus far shall you come, and no farther”.

When a society publicly avows that certain principles, human dignity and the integrity of persons, are non negotiable, it restores those ideals to the centre of the public square.

This is what a rules-based order is for: to foreground the human person before power and profit. Where such an order is honoured, flourishing follows; where it is neglected, flourishing is the first casualty.

Small acts of moral probity — even a mere 0.11 percent — may appear inconsequential.

Beacons for human progress
Yet as articulations of what we hold valuable, they resound deeply in the moral universe. They are the lit matches that, gathered, become the beacon that lights human progress.

Recent years have seen our public life dominated by the contrary impulse: to measure every policy by an economic yardstick calibrated to austerity.

As we enter an election year, two paths lie before us: one paved by slavish adherence to instrumental rationality, the other by a politics that puts people in a place of honour and treats wellbeing, security, and human flourishing as the purpose, not by product, of policy.

We have precedents. In the 1930s, as the world entered a moment not unlike our own, New Zealand, small, distant, still reeling from the Depression, adopted what became known as a moral foreign policy.

After that most devastating conflict, we added our voice to a chorus that helped shape a rules-based international order privileging human rights, cooperation, and diplomacy over war.

From the gradual undermining of that settlement, particularly after the crisis-ridden 1970s, one can trace many of today’s global and national disorders.

So what has all this to do with UniSaver?

Instability gathering pace
From our relatively safe redoubt at the bottom of the world, we watch instability elsewhere gather pace. Shall we respond in the same polarising, amoral terms or recover the loftier stance that once gave us outsized moral influence?

The UniSaver Board now faces a profound opportunity. In opposing the 715 who call for ethical investment, it has chosen expediency over ethics.

But morality often begins with small, unfashionable acts that grow, over time, into the juggernaut of social change.

Consider how a small student-led divestment campaign in the 1950s catalysed what became the global movement that helped topple South African apartheid.

Such actions shift the parameters of the values debate. Even if it concerns only 0.11 percent, UniSaver can redraw the moral horizon.

If its decision signals that we value a fair go for all — yes, even for far off Palestinians — it will achieve far more than a simple reassignment of assets.

It will have reminded us who we are.

And it will return UniSaver to being an institution to be proud of, one that affirms that people matter at least as much as the return on investment.

Dr Vincent Wijeysingha is senior lecturer in social work and social policy at Massey University. He is a member of Uni Workers 4 Palestine but writes here in a personal capacity.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

New Plymouth has admitted it has investments in companies active in illegal Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land, contrary to New Zealand government foreign policy and United Nations rulings.

The revelation comes a week after Mayor Neil Holdom refused a request from Parihaka Pā and all the district’s iwi to make sure the council was not invested in companies profiting from the settlements.

The shareholdings sparked a hostile debate with Holdom accusing councillor Bali Haque of politicising the district’s nest-egg for virtue signalling, and Haque in turn questioning the mayor’s honesty and integrity.

The investments were made from New Plymouth District Council’s $400 million Perpetual Investment Fund (PIF).

The money is managed by Mercer in a passive fund, which automatically follows an index of companies and chooses which shares to buy.

Eight companies invested in by Mercer have been named by the UN as enabling and profiting from the expansion of Israeli settlements in Palestinian Occupied Territories:

• Motorola Solutions — the security arm of the mobile phone maker.
• Travel companies Expedia, Airbnb, and Booking Holdings which owns Booking.com and other sites.
• French multinational railways manufacturer Alstom
• Three Israeli banks, including the country’s first and third biggest — which often offer concessionary loans to settlers.

Less than $1m involved
Less than a million dollars is involved, just a quarter of one percent of New Plymouth’s PIF.

Haque wanted Mercer to be told that NPDC strongly disagrees with investing in companies active in the settlements and wants the investments ended as soon as possible.

He also proposed that the council-owned company overseeing the fund — the PIF Guardians — bring more advice on the process and cost of divestment if Mercer did not act.

“We need to do something,” Haque said.

“It’s small, I understand less than a million we’re talking about, but it is significant in terms of the impact . . .  This is something we can actually do and control.”

Mayor Neil Holdom repeated his explanation to the Parihaka delegation for opposing any action.

“Given the deeply sensitive and complex nature of the Israeli-Palestine conflict we’ve gotta approach this with a great deal of care and it’s my view that supporting this could be seen as taking a position in a dispute that has profound emotional and personal significance for members of our community on both sides.”

‘A terrible conflict’
The Mayor then turned to Haque.

“It is clear councillor Haque cares deeply about this issue and wants this debate and in the desperation to signal his personal conviction now wants to start playing politics with the PIF.

“It’s a terrible conflict, it’s a disaster for everybody involved but now someone wants to drag our community’s $400 million investment fund into this and make it a political football, to make a political point.”

Haque, clearly shocked, said it was Holdom himself who had told him to bring the motion to the Council Controlled Organisations committee.

“I’m staggered that now you have now done an about face and turned the tables . . .  You were the very person who encouraged me to put this very motion to this committee and now you are attacking me personally for actually acting on the basis of what you asked me to do.

“So my respect — with respect — has declined in your honesty and integrity.”

Neil Holdom: “Wow! Wow, unbelievable.”

Chair Marie Pearce: “Yeah”

Councillor Murray Chong “He didn’t attack you at all

Councillor Anneke Carlson Mathews: “That was a full-on attack!”

Pearce barely kept control of the meeting.

‘Getting out of hand’
“This is getting totally out of hand.”

Once tempers cooled, the Mayor explained that advice from the PIF Guardians was that the low-cost passive fund offered no control over Mercer’s decision and putting the funds in different management could cost up to $3.2 million a year in higher fees.

Holdom said he had told Haque of the advice.

Haque said that he had adjusted his proposal in response and read Holdom’s text message advising him to bring a proposal to instruct Mercer to comply with UN resolutions.

“We heard that it might be expensive but I’d quite like to know what it is we’re up for if Mercer decides not to act on the basis of what we’re saying,” said Haque.

Councillors Haque, Carson Matthews, and Bryan Vickery voted for Haque’s proposal.

They were defeated by Mayor Holdom and councillors Pearce, Murray Chong and Max Brough.

Councillor David Bublitz abstained, wanting the PIF to divest shares linked to any conflict anywhere in the world.

NZ co-sponsored Resolution 2334
New Zealand in 2016 co-sponsored UN Security Council Resolution 2334, declaring Israeli settlements in Palestine a violation of international law.

The resolution obliges states and entities “to withdraw all recognition, aid and assistance to Israel’s illegal presence in the occupied Palestine territory.”

In July this year, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s settlements in Gaza and West Bank are illegal and ordered Israel to stop building new settlements and evacuate existing ones.

In September, the UN General Assembly — including Foreign Minister Winston Peters — called on all States to make sure their people, companies and entities and authorities “do not act in any way that would entail recognition or provide aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a community partner of both RNZ and LDR.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

INVESTIGATION: By Wendy Bacon

Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and the West Bank is tearing apart local councils in Australia, on top of the angst reverberating around state and federal politics.

Inner West Labor Mayor Darcy Byrne has doubled down on his attack on pro-Palestinian activists at the council’s last election meeting before Australia’s local government elections on September 14.

‘Byrne’s attack echoes an astro-turfing campaign supported by rightwing and pro-Israel groups targeting the Greens in inner city electorates.’

• READ MORE: Other articles by Wendy Bacon

With Labor narrowly controlling the council by one vote, the election loomed large over the meeting. It also coincided with a campaign backed by rightwing pro-Israeli groups to eliminate Greens from several inner Sydney councils.

In August, Labor councillors voted down a motion for an audit of whether any Inner West Council (IWC) investments or contracts benefit companies involved in the weapons industry or profit from human rights violations in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

The motion that was defeated had also called for an insertion of a general “human rights” provision in council’s investment policy.

With similar motions having been passed at City of Sydney and Canterbury/Bankstown councils, many had expected the motion to pass in what is supposed to be one of the most progressive areas of Sydney.

It could have been a first step towards the Inner West Council joining the worldwide BDS (boycotts, disinvestments and economic sanctions) campaign to pressure Israel to meet its obligations under international law.

MWM sources attest that the ructions at Inner West Council are mirrored elsewhere in local government. This from Randwick in Sydney’s East:

Global to grassroots
Last week, Portland Council in Maine became the fifth United States city to join the campaign this year, while the City of Ixelles in Belgium announced that it had suspended its twinning agreement with the Regional Council of Megiddo in Israel.

When the Inner West motion failed, some Palestinian rights campaigners booed and shouted “shame” at Labor councillors as they sat silently in the chamber. The meeting, which had nearly reached its time limit of five hours, was then adjourned.

Byrne’s alternative motion was debated at last week’s meeting. It restates council’s existing policy and Federal Labor’s current stance that calls for a ceasefire and a two-state solution.

This alternative motion was passed by Labor councillors, with the Greens and two Independents voting against it. Both Independent Councillor Pauline Lockie and Greens Councillor Liz Atkins argued that they were opposing the motion because it did not do or change anything.

The Mayor spent most of his speaking time attacking those involved with protesting at the August meeting. He described their behaviour as  “unacceptable, undemocratic and disrespectful”. There is no doubt that the behaviour at the meeting breached the rules of meeting behaviour at some times.

But then Byrne made a much more shocking and unexpected allegation. He said that the “worst element” of the behaviour was that “local Inner West citizens who happened to have a Jewish sounding name, when their names were read out by me because they’d registered . . . to speak, I think all of them were booed and hissed just because their names happened to sound Jewish.”

News Corp propaganda
This claim is deeply disturbing. If true, such behaviour would definitely be anti-semitic and racist. But the question is: did such behaviour actually happen? Or does this allegation feed into Byrne’s misleading narrative that had fuelled false News Corporation reports that protesters stormed the meeting?

In fact, the protesters had been invited to the meeting by the Mayor.

This reporter was present throughout the meeting and did not observe anything similar to what the Mayor alleged had happened.

Later in the meeting, the Mayor repeated the allegation that the “booing and hissing of people” based “on the fact that they had a Jewish sounding name constituted anti-semitism”.

Retiring Independent Councillor Pauline Locker intervened: “Sorry, point of order, That isn’t actually what happened. . . . It wasn’t based on their Jewish name.”

But Bryne insisted, “That’s not a point of order — that is what happened. It is what the record shows occurred as does the media reportage.”

Other councillors also distanced themselves from Byrne’s allegation. Independent Councillor John Stamolis also said that although he could not judge how the Mayor or other Labor councillors felt on the evening, he could not agree with Byrne’s description or that it described what other councillors or members of the public experienced on the evening.

Greens Councillor Liz Atkins said that there were different perceptions of what happened on the night. Her perception was that the “booing and hissing” was in relation to support for the substance of the Greens motion for an audit of investments rather than an attack on people who spoke against it.

She also said that credit should be given to pro- Palestinian activists who themselves encouraged people to listen quietly.

Fake antisemitism claims
Your reporter asked Rosanna Barbero, who also was present throughout the meeting, what she observed. Barbero was the recipient of this year’s Multicultural NSW Human Rights Medal, recognising her lasting and meaningful contribution to human rights in NSW.

She is also a member of the Inner West Multicultural Network that has helped council develop an anti-racism strategy.

“I did not witness any racist comments,” said Barbero.

Barbero confirmed that she was present throughout the meeting and said: “I did not witness any racist comments. The meeting was recorded so the evidence of that is easy to verify.”

So this reporter, in a story for City Hub, took her advice and went to the evidence in the webcast, which provides a public record of what occurred. The soundtrack is clear. A listener can pick up when comments are made by audience members but not necessarily the content of them.

Bryne has alleged speakers against the motion were booed when their “Jewish sounding’ names were announced. Our analysis shows none of the five were booed or abused in any way when their names were announced.

There was, in fact, silence.

Five speakers identified themselves as Jewish. Four spoke against the motion, and one in favour.

Two of the five were heard in complete silence, one with some small applause at the end.

One woman who spoke in favour of the motion and whose grandparents were in the Holocaust was applauded and cheered at the end of her speech.

One man was interrupted by several comments from the gallery when he said the motion was based on “propaganda and disinformation” and would lead to a lack of social cohesion. He related experiences of anti-semitism when he was at school in the Inner West 14 years ago.

At the conclusion of his speech, there were some boos.

One man who had not successfully registered was added to the speakers list by the Mayor. Some people in the public gallery objected to this decision. The Mayor adjourned the meeting for three minutes and the speaker was then heard in silence.

The speakers in favour of the motion, most of whom had Palestinian backgrounds and relatives who had suffered expulsion from their homelands, concentrated on the war crimes against Palestinians and the importance of BDS motions. There were no personal attacks on speakers against the motion.

In response to a Jewish speaker who had argued that the solution was peace initiatives, one Palestinian speaker said that he wanted “liberation”, not “peace”.

Weaponising accusations of anti-semitism to shut down debate
Independent Inner West Councillor Pauline Lockie warned other councillors this week about the need to be careful about weaponising accusations of race and anti-semitism to shut down debates. Like Barbero, Lockie has played a leadership role in developing anti-racism strategies for the Inner West.

There are three serious concerns about Byrne’s allegations. The first concern is that they are not verified by the public record. This raises questions about the Mayor’s judgement and credibility.

The second is that making unsubstantiated allegations of antisemitism for the tactical purposes of winning a political argument demeans the seriousness and tragedy of anti-semitism.

Thirdly, there is a concern that spreading unsubstantiated allegations of anti-semitism could cause harm by spreading fear and anxiety in the Jewish community.

Controversial Christian minister
The most provocative speaker on the evening was not one of those who identified themselves as Jewish. It was Reverend Mark Leach, who introduced himself as an Anglican minister from Balmain. When he said that no one could reasonably apply the word “genocide” to what was occurring in Gaza, several people called out his comments.

Given the ICJ finding that a plausible genocide is occurring in Gaza, this was not surprising.

Darcy Byrne then stopped the meeting and gave Reverend Leach a small amount of further time to speak. Later in his speech, Reverend Leach described the motion itself as “deeply racist” because it held Israel accountable above all other states.

Boos for Leach
In fact, the motion would have added a general human rights provision to the investment policy which would have applied to any country. Reverend Leach was booed at the conclusion of his speech.

One speaker later said that she could not understand how this Christian minister would not accept that the word “genocide” could be used. This was not an anti-semitic or racist comment.

Throughout the debate, Byrne avoided the issue that the motion only called for an audit.

He also used his position of chair to directly question councillors. The following exchange occurred with Councillor Liz Atkins:

Mayor: Councilor Atkins, can I put to you a question? I have received advice that councillor officers are unaware of any investment from council that is complicit in the Israeli military operations in Gaza and the Palestinian territories. Are you aware of any?

Atkins:  No. That’s why the motion asked for an audit of our investments and procurements.

Mayor:  I’ll put one further question to you. The organisers of the protest outside the chamber and the subsequent overrunning of the council chamber asserted in their promotion of the event that the council was complicit in genocide. Is that your view?

Atkins:  I don’t know. Until we do an audit, Mayor . . . Can I just take exception with the point of view that they “overran” the meeting? You invited them all in, and not one of them tried to get past a simple rope barrier.

Byrne says it’s immoral to support a one-party state
During the debate, Byrne surprisingly described support for a one-state solution for Israel and Palestinians as “immoral”. He described support for “one state” as meaning you either supported the wiping out of the Palestinians or the Israelis.

In fact, there is a long history of citizens, scholars and other commentators who have argued that one secular state of equal citizens is the only viable solution.

Many, including the Australian government, do not agree. Nevertheless, the award-winning journalist and expert on the Middle East, Antony Loewenstein, argued that position in The Sydney Morning Herald in November 2023.

Mayor in tune with Better Council Inc campaign
All of this debate is happening in the context of the hotly contested election campaign. The Mayor is understandably preoccupied with the impending poll. Rather than debating the issues, he finished the debate by launching an attack on the Greens, which sounded more like an election speech than a speech in reply in support of his motion.

Byrne said: “Some councillors are unwilling to condemn what was overt anti-Semitism”.

This is a heavy accusation. All councillors are strongly opposed to anti-semitism. The record does not show any overt anti-semitism.

Byrne went on: “But the more troubling thing is that there’s a large number of candidates running at this election who, if elected, will be making foreign affairs and this particular issue one of the central concerns of this council.

“This will result in a distraction with services going backwards and rates going up.”

In fact, the record shows that the Greens are just as focused on local issues as any other councillors. Even at last week’s meeting, Councillor Liz Atkins brought forward a motion about controversial moves to install a temporary cafe at Camperdown Park that would privatise public space and for which there had been no consultation.

Labor v Greens
Byrne’s message pitting concern about broader issues against local concerns is in tune with the messaging of a recently formed group called Better Council Inc. that is targeting the Greens throughout the Inner West and in Randwick and Waverley.

Placards saying “Put the Greens last”, “Keep the Greens Garbage out of Council” featuring a number of Greens candidates have gone up across Sydney. Some claim that the Greens are fixated on Gaza and ignore local issues.

Better Inc.’s material is authorised by Sophie Calland. She is a recently graduated computer engineer who told the Daily Telegraph that “she was a Labor member and that Better Council involves people from across the political aisle — even some former Greens.”

She described the group as a “grassroots group of young professionals” who wanted local government officials to focus on local issues.

“We believe local councils should concentrate on essential community services like waste management, local infrastructure, and the environment. That’s what councils are there for — looking after the needs of their immediate communities.”

On Saturday, Randwick Greens Councillor Kym Chapple was at a pre-poll booth at which a Better Council Inc. campaigner was handing out material specifically recommending that voters put her last.

Chapple tweeted that the Better councilwoman didn’t actually know that she was a councillor or any of the local issues in which she had been involved.

“That does not look like a local grassroots campaign. It’s an attempt to intimidate people who support a free Palestine. Anyway, it feels gross to have someone say to put you last because they care about the environment and local issues when that’s literally what you have done for three years.”

She then tweeted a long list of her local campaign successes.

Weaponising antisemitism – extremist astroturfers infiltrate local councils amid Palestine protests#auspol #innerwest #randwick #canterbury
Story by @Wendy_Bacon https://t.co/fqB6PCwLnP

— 💧Michael West (@MichaelWestBiz) September 9, 2024

Never Again is Now astroturf campaign
In fact, the actual work of distributing the leaflets is being done by a group spearheaded by none other than Reverend Mark Leach, who spoke at the Inner West Council meeting. Leach is one of the coordinators of the pro-Israel right-wing Christian group Never Again is Now.

The group is organising rallies around Australia to campaign against anti-semitism.

Reverend Mark Leach works closely with his daughter Freya Leach, who stood for the Liberal Party for the seat of Balmain in the 2023 state election and is associated with the rightwing Menzies Institute. Mark Leach describes himself as “working to renew the mind and heart of our culture against the backdrop of the radical left, Jihadist Islam and rising authoritarianism.

Leach’s own Twitter account shows that he embraces a range of rightwing causes. He is anti-trans, supports anti-immigration campaigners in the UK and has posted a jolly video of himself with Warren Mundine at a pro-Israeli rally in Melbourne.

Mundine was a No campaign spokesperson for the rightwing group Advance Australia during the Voice referendum.

Leach supports the Christian Lobby and is very critical of Christians who are campaigning for peace.

Anti-semitism exists. The problem is that Reverend Leach’s version of anti-semitism is what international law and human rights bodies regard as protesting against genocidal war crimes.

For #NeverAgainisNow, these atrocities are excusable for a state that is pursuing its right of “self-defence”. And if you don’t agree with that, don’t be surprised if you find yourself branded as not just “anti-semitic” but also a bullying extremist.

As of one week before the local government election, the Never Again is Now was holding a Zoom meeting to organise 400 volunteers to get 50,000 leaflets into the hands of voters at next Saturday’s local election.

This may well be just a dress rehearsal for a much bigger effort at the Federal election, where Advance Australia has announced it is planning to target the Greens.

Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was professor of journalism at UTS. She has worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is not a member of any political party but is a Greens supporter and long-term supporter of peaceful BDS strategies. Republished from Michael West Media with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

After almost a year of consistent pressure from the student body, the Victoria University of Wellington (VUW) Foundation has announced its divestment from all Israeli government bonds and shares of companies listed in Israel.

The foundation had previously reported having close to $50,000 invested in Israeli government bonds, which finance the apartheid state’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.

The news of divestment came through some weeks after Student Justice for Palestine Pōneke (SJPP) conducted an unannounced sit-in at the Hunter Building, where the vice-chancellor’s office of Te Herenga Waka – Victoria University of Wellington is located.

Two weeks prior to that action, the Kelburn campus was adorned with spray-painted messages by activists calling for the university to divest from genocide.

Pressure on the VUW leadership and the foundation to disclose and divest, which has been ramping up over the last year, has come from multiple campus groups. These include SJPP, VUW Student Association (VUWSA), Ngāi Tauira, VicMuslims Club and Uni Workers for Palestine.

“This is a big, collective win; undoubtedly the work of numerous individuals and groups that have remained consistent in their activism for Palestine,” said Frank Mackenzie, an organiser at SJPP.

“This is student power, pushing to hold these academic institutions and leaders to account, so that we are not complicit in these settler colonial, genocidal regimes.

“And yet — divestment is the very least the university can do. It is only the first step.

“The foundation and university leaders must now institutionalise a commitment to divesting from human rights violators. We can’t leave the door open for leadership to walk back this win.

“The only way to ensure that is to implement a full, financial and academic Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS) policy against Israel. We also need ongoing proactive disclosure of all investments so the university and foundation can be held accountable” .

Marcail Parkinson, president of VUWSA, said: “As the only student on the university’s foundation board I am incredibly encouraged by the foundation’s move to stop supporting genocide and divest from Israeli government bonds.

“This victory reflects the power of collective student action. This moment demonstrates the profound influence students can have in shaping the future of our institution.

“I am deeply proud of what we’ve achieved, and I hope students continue to push for change.”

An open letter by SJPP calling for divestment, BDS policy and scholarships for Palestinian students was signed by 1400 people. The university has not formally responded to the letter.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Following an open letter by Auckland University academics speaking out in support of their students’ right to protest against the genocidal Israeli war on Gaza, a group of academics at Otago University have today also called on New Zealand academic institutions to “repair colonial violence” and end divestment from any economic ties with Israel.

“In order to honour commitments to decolonisation and human rights, universities must act now,” says the open letter signed by more than 165 academics.

“As a te Tiriti-led university in Aotearoa New Zealand”, the academic staff said they were calling for the University of Otago to immediately:

1. Endorse the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and disclose and divest from any economic ties to the apartheid state of Israel,
2. Condemn those universities [that] have called on police to violently remove protesters from their campuses, and
3. Call for the protection of students’ rights to protest and assemble and endorse the aims of those protests — the immediate demand of ceasefire and longer term demands to end the apartheid, violence, and illegal occupations under which Palestinians continue to suffer.

The full letter states:

“Kia ora koutou,

“As we write this letter, universities across the United States have become battlegrounds. University administrators are sanctioning and encouraging violence against students and faculty members as they protest the genocidal violence in Gaza.

“Over 35,000 Palestinians have been killed—of those deaths, it is estimated that more than 13,000 of them have been children. Israel has destroyed all 12 universities in Gaza and targeted staff and students at those universities.

“The recent discovery of mass graves in Gaza, the hands and feet of many victims bound, has shocked the conscience of the world.

“In keeping with a long tradition of campus protest, students and staff are demanding their universities stop contributing to genocidal violence.

Student bodies brutalised
“In return, their bodies have been brutalised, their own universities endorsing their arrests. Universities should, at the very least, offer crucial spaces for protest, debate, and working through collective responses to urgent social issues. Instead, administrators have called in militarised police forces, fully decked out in anti-riot regalia to repress student protests.

“The results have been predictable: Professors and students have been arrested en masse and physically assaulted (beaten, pepper-sprayed, shot with rubber bullets, knocked unconscious, choked, and dragged limp across university lawns, their hands cuffed behind them).

“We at the University of Otago, an institution committed to acknowledging, confronting, and seeking to repair colonial violence, are part of a society that extends far beyond the borders of Aotearoa New Zealand.

“Acknowledging our history, including that history within its students’ experiences and working practices, compels us as a collective to call out and condemn colonial violence as and when we see it. It is not at all surprising that many of the protests in Aotearoa New Zealand calling for a ceasefire in Gaza have been organised and led by Māori alongside Palestinian activists.

“Most recently, the Ngāti Kahungunu iwi have come out against the genocide, with one of the rally organisers, Te Ōtane Huata, stating “Tino rangatiratanga to me isn’t only self-determination of our people, it is also collective liberation.”

“If it is to mean anything to be a te Tiriti-led university here in Aotearoa New Zealand, we must include acknowledgment that the history of Aotearoa New Zealand has been marked by consistent and egregious violations of that very treaty, and that such violations are indelibly part of settler colonialism.

“Violent expropriation, cultural annihilation, and suppression of resistance have been the hallmarks of this project.

Decolonisation and human rights
“In order to honour commitments to decolonisation and human rights, universities must act now. We thus call for the University of Otago to immediately:

“1. Endorse the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and disclose and divest from any economic ties to the apartheid state of Israel,
“2. Condemn those universities who have called on police to violently remove protesters from their campuses,
“3. Call for the protection of students’ rights to protest and assemble and endorse the aims of those protests – the immediate demand of ceasefire and longer term demands to end the apartheid, violence, and illegal occupations under which Palestinians continue to suffer.

“In other words, the University must call for a liberated Palestinian state if it is to conceptualise itself as a university that seeks to confront its own settler-colonial foundations.

“The above position aligns with the named values of our universities here in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is our duty that we make these demands, particularly as Palestinians have seen the systematic destruction of their universities and educational infrastructure while Palestinian students of our universities have witnessed their families and friends targeted by the Israeli government.

“If the University of Otago wants to authentically position itself as an institution that takes seriously its role as a critic and conscience of society and acknowledges the importance of coming to grips with ongoing settler-colonial violence, it should take these demands seriously.

“We further support the Open Letter to Vice-Chancellor Dawn Freshwater from Auckland University Staff in Solidarity with Students Protesting for Palestine.”

In solidarity,
Dr Peyton Bond (Teaching Fellow, Sociology, Gender Studies and Criminology)
Dr Simon Barber (Lecturer in Sociology)
Rachel Anna Billington (PhD candidate, Politics)
Dr Neil Vallelly (Lecturer in Sociology)
Erin Silver (PhD candidate, Sociology)
Professor Richard Jackson (Leading Thinker Chair in Peace and Conflict Studies)
Dr Lynley Edmeades (Lecturer in English)
Dr Olivier Jutel (Lecturer in Media, Film and Communication)
Lydia Le Gros (PhD candidate & Assistant Research Fellow, Public Health)
Dr Abbi Virens (Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Sustainability)
Sonja Bohn (PhD candidate, Sociology)
Joshua James (PhD Candidate, Gender Studies)
Sophie van der Linden (Postgrad Student, Bioethics)
Dr Fairleigh Evelyn Gilmour (Lecturer in Gender Studies, Criminology)
Brandon Johnstone (Administrator, TEU Otago Branch Committee Member)
Dr David Jenkins (Lecturer in Politics)
Jordan Dougherty (Masters student, Sociology)
Rosemary Overell (Senior Lecturer in Media, Film and Communication)
Dr Sebastiaan Bierema – (Research Fellow, Public Health)
Dr Sabrina Moro (Lecturer in Media, Film and Communication studies)
Rauhina Scott-Fyfe (Māori Archivist, Hocken Collections)
Dr Lena Tan (Senior Lecturer, International Relations & Politics)
Cassie Withey-Rila (Assistant Research Fellow, Otago Medical School)
Duncan Newman (Postgrad student, Management)

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A group of 65 Auckland University academics have written an open letter to vice-chancellor Dawn Freshwater criticising the institution’s stance over students protesting in solidarity with Palestine.

They have called on her administration to “support” the students who were denied permission to establish an “overnight encampment” by students over Israel’s war on Gaza, and criticised her for “minimising” the seriousness of the seven-month war that has been widely characterised as genocide.

They have also criticised the vice-chancellor’s announcement for failing to acknowledge that “our students were planning to establish an encampment to urge the University of Auckland to divest from any entities and corporations enabling Israel’s ongoing military violence against Palestinians in Gaza, where at least 34,535 Palestinians have been killed by Israel’s military operations since 7 October 2023″.

Their open letter said in full:

“Tēnā koe Vice-Chancellor Dawn Freshwater,

“As members of staff of the University of Auckland, we are deeply concerned by your announcement of 30 April 2024 advising students and staff of your decision to not support the establishment of an overnight encampment by students protesting in solidarity with Palestine.

“Firstly, we are concerned that your announcement failed to acknowledge that our students were planning to establish an encampment to urge the University of Auckland to divest from any entities and corporations enabling Israel’s ongoing military violence against Palestinians in Gaza, where at least 34,535 Palestinians have been killed by Israel’s military operations since 7 October 2023. Importantly, UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese recently found that there are ‘reasonable grounds’ to determine that this violence by Israel amounts to the commission of the crime of genocide. Rather than acknowledging this cause, your announcement disappointingly mischaracterised and minimised Israel’s violence as a ‘conflict’ and the resulting humanitarian crisis as a ‘heightened geopolitical tension.’

“Secondly, we are concerned that in making your decision, you sought advice from the New Zealand Police rather than from your own students and staff. We believe that this approach to such an important matter falls short of the ‘values which bind us as a university community’ you mentioned in your announcement.

“Thirdly, we are concerned that the reason you have provided for your decision is that the University of Auckland needs to avoid ‘introducing the significant risks that such encampments have brought to other university campuses.’ We believe that this reasoning erroneously places the blame for any safety risks in overseas campuses on students and staff who established peaceful encampments, rather than on university administrators who decided to seek unnecessary police intervention to break up these encampments, which has then led to the unjust arrests and detainments of students and staff.

“Finally, we are concerned that your decision to seek the advice of the New Zealand Police and blame peaceful encampments for safety risks in other campuses suggests that you intend to call the New Zealand Police on your students and staff who decide to exercise their right to protest with a peaceful encampment on campus grounds. We believe that making such a suggestion to students and staff also falls short of the ‘values which bind us as a university community’ you mentioned in your announcement.

“Accordingly, we urge you to reverse your decision and to offer your full support to students and staff who may choose to exercise their right to protest by establishing a peaceful encampment on campus grounds.

“We also urge you not to discipline or penalise students and staff who may choose to participate in peaceful protests and encampments in any way, and to engage with them in good faith and in accordance with the ‘values which bind us as a university community’.

Ngā mihi nui,

Auckland University Staff in Solidarity with Students

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

From France to Australia, university pro-Palestine protests in the United States have now spread to several countries with students pitching on-campus camps.

And students at Columbia and other US universities remain defiant as campuses have witnessed the biggest protests since the anti-Vietnam war and anti-apartheid eras in the 1960s and 1980s.

But authorities have cracked down at some institutions against the peaceful demonstrations with at least 550 being arrested in the US, reports Al Jazeera.

Clashes between students and police officers have been reported across the US during intensifying university protests with encampments in at at least 20 institutions.

Ali Harb, a Washington-based commentator on US foreign policy, Arab-American issues, civil rights and politics, says the Gaza-focused campus protest movement “highlights a generational divide over Israel” in the US.

Young people are willing to challenge politicians and college administrators across the country, he says.

“The opinion gap — with younger Americans generally more supportive of Palestinians than the generations that came before them — poses a risk to 81-year-old Democratic President Joe Biden’s re-election chances,” says Harb.

“It could also threaten the bipartisan backing that Israel enjoys in Washington.”

Divestment from Israel
What started as the Gaza solidarity encampment at Columbia University, where students camped inside campus to push their institute to divest from companies linked to Israel, has since spread to campuses in California, Texas and other states.

The students are protesting against Israel’s war on Gaza, where Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 34,000 people and its blockade has caused starvation.

Students have been demonstrating worldwide in support of Gaza since the outbreak of the war on October 7.

Following the Columbia encampments, the protests have further spread to universities from France to Australia. Here is a summary:

In Paris, France, Sorbonne University students have taken to the streets. Additionally, the Palestine Committee from Sciences Po, is organising a protest where students set up about 10 tents on Wednesday. Despite a police crackdown, the protesters regathered on Thursday.

In Australia, students from the University of Sydney set up pro-Palestine encampments on Tuesday, and they were continuing to protest yesterday. Also, University of Melbourne students have pitched tents on the south lawn of their main campus.

In Rome, Italy, students from Sapienza University organised demonstrations, sit-ins and hunger strikes on April 17 and April 18.

Investigating Israeli ties
In the United Kingdom, students from the University of Warwick’s group Warwick Stands With Palestine have occupied the campus piazza. In Leicester, a protest broke out on Monday in which students from the University of Leicester Palestine Society also participated.

Last month, students from the University of Leeds occupied a campus building in protest against the university’s involvement with Israel.

Hicham, a student protesting at Sciences Po, which is also called the Paris Institute of Political Studies, told Al Jazeera, “We have a few demands but one of them is to start investigating all of the ties they [Sciences Po] have with the state of Israel, which [are] academic and financial”.

The students are calling on the French government to provide more help to the Palestinians.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The multi-billion-dollar NZ Super Fund  – New Zealand’s state pension fund – has finally divested from five of Israel’s biggest banks due to their funding of illegal settlement construction in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

New Zealand Green Party MP Golriz Ghahraman said the party welcomed the decision, telling The Spinoff:

“Our nation’s values and legal obligations have been long in breach by investments facilitating what the United Nations has consistently called an illegal occupation, causing the suffering of the Palestinian people, and leading to a number of other breaches of humanitarian law.”

A Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) statement last week said that Palestinian supporters in Aotearoa-New Zealand had frequently complained about these banks to the NZ Super Fund, especially following a 2018 report by Human Rights Watch which identified their active participation in settlement building in breach of international law.

In 2012, the NZ Super Fund ended its investment with three Israeli companies on ethical grounds. These were companies that were directly building illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa spokesperson Janfrie Wakim said that the NZ Super Fund had, at last, conducted a thorough investigation and reached a firm conclusion that it would be unethical to continue to invest in these banks.

As documented by @hrw, in a 41 page report, most of Israel’s largest banks are complicit in settler colonialist apartheid as they help support, maintain, and expand illegal settlements by financing their construction in the occupied West Bank.https://t.co/Uq3KNitspC

— BDS movement (@BDSmovement) March 3, 2021

“There is a wealth of reliable information and law that makes any continuing NZ Super Fund investment with these banks untenable. No New Zealand institution should provide any support to the ongoing dispossession of the Palestinian people in their homeland and the brutal Israeli occupation,” she said.

“The fund still has investments in other Israeli companies, and the fund says it will be paying close attention to any future reports from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights about the culpability of other Israeli companies in illegal settlement construction.”

NZ government ‘lagging behind’
Janfrie Wakim also said that the NZ Super Fund divestment decision – and the evidence it had used – had shown up what she called a “dreadful lagging behind” by the New Zealand government.

“The NZ Super Fund divested in weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems in its first round of Israeli disinvestment in 2012,” Wakim said.

“Yet, the New Zealand government has admitted to buying military equipment, ground tested on Palestinians, from Elbit Systems, which is the very same company which the NZ Super Fund dropped from its portfolio in 2012.”

Roger Fowler is a veteran peace activist and community advocate from Auckland, Aotearoa-New Zealand, and coordinator of Kia Ora Gaza which organises support for international solidarity convoys and the Freedom Flotillas to break Israel’s illegal blockade of Gaza. Fowler is editor of kiaoragaza.net. This article was first published in The Palestine Chronicle and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

• The NZ Super Fund document on the Israeli banks is here.

NZ’s $50b Super Fund is divesting from Israeli banks that fund settlement construction in West Bank and Gaza https://t.co/HwnSkXXlcj

— The Spinoff (@TheSpinoffTV) March 4, 2021

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Four Indonesian ministers gathered to witness the signing of an agreement between state-owned mining holding group PT Indonesia Asahan Aluminium (Inalum) and Freeport-McMoran (FCX) to take over Papua’s PT Freeport Indonesia (PTFI) in complex deals worth $3.85 billion.

Under the agreement, Indonesia will take control of 51 percent of Freeport Indonesia’s equity, and hold a majority stake in the company that operates the world’s largest gold mine, Grasberg in Papua.

The signing was the culmination of years of negotiations, preceding the current administration of President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, and a tug-of-war between Indonesia and the American company.

The presence of four ministers at the signing was an indication of the economic and political importance of the deal to the Jokowi administration. But it is not yet a done deal, as officials have liked to claim.

The agreement requires the two parties to conduct further negotiations to finalise the details of the divestment. The government expects to finish ironing out the details sometime in August.

Freeport’s footprint in Indonesia
Here is your guide to understanding the seemingly never-ending negotiations, and why it matters for Indonesia to cement the deal as soon as possible:

• Freeport-McMoran has operated in Indonesia since it signed its first contract in 1967 in a deal that was good for 30 years. In 1997, it received an extension for its operation until 2021. The two contracts in essence covered mining for copper, with gold and silver treated as associated resources found alongside copper ores.
• Both contracts were signed during the regime of president Suharto. The first contract in 1967 was widely hailed as a landmark moment, symbolising the ushering in of Indonesia’s open-door policy to foreign investment under the pro-Western General Suharto, who had just taken over power from the socialist-leaning Sukarno a year earlier.
• Developing the mines deep in the mountainous jungles of Papua required huge initial investment to build core infrastructure, including roads, housing and power plants, as well as preparing the pool of workers. In return for this investment, Freeport received generous tax breaks.

Freeport’s first phase of operations exploited the Ertsberg Mountain in Mimika regency. Once the mountain was flattened, Freeport turned to mining the adjacent Mt Grasberg, which turned out to contain even larger reserves. Freeport is looking to mine the large gold reserves underground, assuming the latest agreement holds.

Bloomberg Intelligence estimates that the reserves at the world’s biggest gold deposit and second-largest copper mine are worth about $14 billion.

Freeport-MacMoran’s operations in Indonesia accounted for 47 percent of its operating income in 2017, according to Bloomberg.

Freeport’s huge profits have been a source of contention with long-standing criticism that the tax and royalty revenues paid to the Indonesian government represent only a pittance of its true income.

Indonesia’s 9.36 percent stake in PTFI, as stipulated in the 1991 contract of work (CoW), also does not amount to much, particularly as Freeport has at times withheld paying dividends.

For example, PTFI paid Rp 1.4 trillion in dividends in 2017 after three years of failing to make any payments, according to the Finance Ministry.

Freeport has also attracted controversy for the environmental and social impacts of its operations in the heart of Papua.

Last year, the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) came out with a damning report claiming that Freeport had caused $13 billion in environmental damages.

Wind of change for Freeport
In 2009, Indonesia passed the Coal and Mineral Mining Law, or Law No. 4/2009. The law requires all foreign mining companies to divest 51 percent of their shares to the Indonesian government, state-owned or regional-owned enterprises or private Indonesian companies within 10 years of the start of operation.

Freeport has managed to work its way around the regulation by indicating that it is operating under a CoW, which is good until 2021.

In January 2017, the government issued a new regulation requiring all mining contracting companies to switch to special mining permits (IUPK) in order to export products in the form of concentrates, which is one step above ore but still not refined.

Freeport refused to fully comply, arguing that the IUPK was not a nailed-down scheme because the stipulations, including the taxation scheme, could change according to changes in government regulations.

In February 2017, the Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry issued PTFI an IUPK saying the company had finally agreed to the terms, paving the way for the divestment deal signed on Thursday.

Series of agreements
In August 2017, following pressure from the government to divest its shares in PTFI, Freeport-McMoran’s top management agreed to increase Indonesia’s share in PTFI to 51 percent, as well as to develop a smelter and increase Indonesia’s revenue from PTFI’s tax and royalty payments.

The Indonesian government chose state mining holding company Inalum to become the majority shareholder in PTFI.

However, questions remain regarding the price tag and how Inalum will pay for its stake in Freeport. Inalum president director Budi Gunadi Sadikin said on Thursday that the company would have to pay $3.85 billion in August and that it had already secured loans from 11 banks.

What are the benefits of majority ownership in Freeport?

Bisman Bakhtiar, the executive director of the Center for Energy and Mining Law (Pushep), said it was time for Indonesia to take control over the huge gold reserves in Papua, as 50 years had passed since PTFI began operations.

“Too much of our resources have been exploited. Surely after 50 years, we have the capability to operate it ourselves,” Bisman said.

Indonesia will reap the largest share of the profits and dividends, which in the past had almost entirely gone to PTFI. The government will also continue to enjoy taxes, royalties as well as a cut of the revenue.

“There are many ways to maximise the benefits from PTFI for the people, and divestment is one of them,” he said.

However, Bisman urged the government to ensure that Indonesia benefited from the next phase of negotiations to finalise the divestment deal.

“Even though we will finally become the majority owner in August, we need to look at the tax, royalty and revenue sharing arrangements. Are they better or not?”

Stefanno Reinard Sulaiman is a journalist with The Jakarta Post.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz