Mission


Investors Against Genocide is a non-profit organization dedicated to convincing mutual fund and other investment firms to change their investing strategy so as to avoid complicity in genocide. In particular, we want investment firms to avoid or divest holdings of PetroChina (Chinese), Sinopec (Chinese), ONGC (Indian), and Petronas (Malaysian), the four major oil companies that are partnering with the Government of Sudan and helping to fund the genocide in Darfur. The campaign works with individuals, companies, organizations, financial institutions, the press, investment firm employees, and government agencies to build awareness and to create financial, public relations, and regulatory pressure for investment firms to change. The ultimate goals are that investment firms make a commitment to genocide-free investing and that the Government of Sudan ends its deadly genocide in Darfur.

What we expect from investment firms that support genocide-free investing

  • Clear Policy – We want investment firms to adopt a clear and public written policy that clearly identifies criteria for action against genocide and crimes against humanity, defines "problem companies” at least as those that "substantially contribute to genocide and crimes against humanity," states the policy of not holding such "problem companies" and of promptly divesting if they are held, applies to Sudan now, and will apply in the future to other instances of genocide or crimes against humanity.
  • Demonstrate Results – Investment firms must show clear evidence of action in support of the policy. Divesting from at least PetroChina is the minimal substantive demonstration of your policy.
  • Engagement Complications and Requirements – If "engagement" with "problem companies" is a key business tool for an investment firm, then it must publicly identify the "problem companies" that are being engaged, publicly state the type of aggressive engagement planned, and strictly limit the length of time of engagement before divestment so that the short engagement phase leads promptly to implementation of the policy not to hold "problem companies."
  • Additional Transparency – Though it is not a requirement from us, we recommend transparency about the investment firms process, procedures, and excluded companies. Doing so provides a powerful example for others in the industry and would be good for customers trying to understand what the investment firm is doing.

Who we are


Investors Against Genocide is a project of the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur Inc., a 501c3 non-profit.  We welcome volunteers to help with the work of the campaign. 

Here are the primary people at the core of the work of Investors Against Genocide.
  • Eric Cohen is a co-founder and the Chairperson of Investors Against Genocide. He also is a Director of the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur and serves as its President.

    Mr. Cohen retired from a 30+ year career in information technology, where he served in a variety of roles at the corporate vice president level.  Mr. Cohen has been working full-time, on a volunteer basis, with IAG and other Darfur-related work.
  • Susan Morgan is a co-founder and the Director of Communications for Investors Against Genocide.  She is also Executive Director of Pax Communications, a consulting firm dedicated to working with non-profit organizations to increase the media spotlight on their initiatives and related human rights issues.

    Ms. Morgan has a Masters degree in Mass Communications from Boston University and spent over 25 years in various marketing communications and public relations positions at consumer products companies before devoting herself to the human rights arena.
  • William Rosenfeld is a co-founder and the Director of Strategic Initiatives for Investors Against Genocide.  He also is a Director of the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur and serves as its Treasurer.

    Mr. Rosenfeld has over 30 years of Information Technology and management experience.  In addition to his extensive Darfur-related activities, on a volunteer basis, he is currently a self-employed information technology consultant.
  • Irit Tamir is the Director of Government Relations and Outreach for Investors Against Genocide.

    Ms. Tamir is an attorney with a Masters degree in International Law.  She has worked in the government prosecuting hate crimes, served as Legislative Director to a state senator and most recently the Director of Government Relations for a non-profit organization.  She has been a strong advocate on Darfur since 2005 and co-led the effort to pass the Sudan Divestment bill in Massachusetts.
  • Mary Haskell is an Outreach Associate for Investors Against Genocide. In this capacity, Ms. Haskell supports volunteers submitting proposals by providing expert personalized advice and assistance for every step in the process.

    A retired family law attorney, Ms. Haskell is also a member of the Steering Committee for the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur.  Before becoming involved in Darfur-related activism, she volunteered for four decades as an advocate for fair and affordable housing.

What We Believe

  • Financial institutions have a large role to play in changing the actions of the Government of Sudan, in the short term, and in helping to avoid other genocides in the long term. Economic pressure on the Government of Sudan can result in the desired actions, but needs to be increased. All global financial firms with investments in companies funding genocide need to take action regardless of which stock exchange they trade their shares on and where they have their headquarters.
  • Individual US investors have a large role to play in changing the actions of financial institutions that resist ethical responsibility for their investments. Investors can make themselves heard by objecting to the investment policies of the firms that hold their savings, moving to genocide-free investments, filing shareholder resolutions, and working through their employers to change their 401k plans.
  • Targeted divestment, as defined by the Sudan Divestment Task Force, is an effective tool for influencing the Goverment of Sudan. Vigorous engagement by financial institutions with receptive target companies is also an effective tool to encourage change. Divestment is appropriate for companies and investment firms that are unresponsive to requests. Attempting engagement with the companies complicit in genocide should be on an expedited and limited timeframe basis.
  • Pressure for divestment action must be highly focused in order to avoid the "slippery slope" that discourages financial firms from being sensitive to investor's social concerns. "Ethical investing” may mean different things to different people, but genocide-free investing is a minimum standard upon which nearly everyone agrees. We advocate divestment only in the case of genocides; Darfur is the only current example. Similarly, although there are about two dozen "highest offender" companies targeted by the Sudan Divestment Task Force, we target the four worst companies on the "highest offender" list. These are the "Big Four" oil companies (PetroChina, Sinopec, Petronas, and ONGC).
  • Mutual funds should make a commitment to genocide-free investing as a basic principle for ethical investing. Without it, becoming a genocide-free investor is difficult for the average investor. Although market research and the growing support for the Sudan divestment movement indicate broad investor interest, there are few mainstream funds available to investors with a policy of avoiding investments that fund genocide. Investors should feel confident that their investments meet this base level ethical standard even if they don't subscribe to a broader Socially Responsible Investment agenda. Genocide-free investments represent an important marketing opportunity for mainstream mutual funds.
  • The "Big Four" oil companies are not likely to cease operations in Sudan. This presumption is especially clear for the Chinese oil companies, since China has such a strong push to expand its overseas oil supplies. We are not advocating that any of the "Big Four" abandon their assets in Sudan. Given their longterm connection with Sudan, each of the "Big Four" oil companies can and should exercise a strong positive influence on the Government of Sudan while remaining active in the country.
  • Neither fiduciary responsibilities nor practical concerns prevent mutual funds from divesting. Actively managed mutual funds can simply sell their holdings in the Big Four oil companies. Fidelity's Contra Fund, VIP Contra Fund, Advisor New Insight Fund, and New Millenium Fund demonstrated that, despite official Fidelity intransigence, they could sell 448 million H share equivalents of PetroChina and 67 million H
    share equivalents of Sinopec, to cut the connection of those funds to the genocide in Darfur. Even index fund managers have substantial flexibility in tracking to the performance of their benchmarks and need not hold the problem companies.
  • Federal legislative action and state level divestment are important components of an overall strategy to increase economic pressure on the Government of Sudan. Government action complements, but does not replace the need for action by individuals, pension trustees, and investment firms.

Background of the campaign


The campaign began in September 2006 when the Massachusetts Coalition to Save Darfur began work to try to get Fidelity to divest from Sudan, focusing on Fidelity's investments in two problem Chinese oil companies, PetroChina and Sinopec. Fidelity was noteworthy to us because its headquarters are in Boston, it has such a broad base of customers in the US, and, as of December 31, 2006, it had been the largest holder of PetroChina on the NYSE, and it reached 5% ownership in PetroChina, with holdings worth $1.3 billion, mostly on the Hong Kong exchange. Over the last several years, while the death toll from the genocide in Darfur was mounting, Fidelity pursued a policy of increasing its holdings in PetroChina.

We were unsuccessful in privately engaging Fidelity, though we spent 3½ months trying, with 5 different letters to a total of 51 executives, trustees, board members and fund managers, and with various personal contacts and informal channels. We launched a public campaign at the end of January 2007, with a website, FidelityOutOfSudan.com, emails, and outreach to the press and the public at large. After a fair amount of publicity and thousands of customers contacting Fidelity to complain, Fidelity remained officially unmoved. However, we were apparently successful in getting through to one Fidelity fund manager who, during calendar Q1 and Q2, sold all of his PetroChina and Sinopec holdings, which represented nearly all of Fidelity's holdings of those two companies on the NYSE. This was big news; the PetroChina divestment alone was about $600 million. Unfortunately, since Fidelity still owned about $700 million of PetroChina and continued to repeat its usual public statements, it was clear that Fidelity had not made a corporate decision to divest.

One of the things we learned from our attempts to engage Fidelity and in talking with other major mutual fund companies, is that, even when confronted with the problem of investing in genocide, they ignore the moral issue, accepting no principle governing their investments beyond financial returns and obeying the law. Fidelity's public statements to this effect have made many thousands of people upset with them, but it is clear, now, that Fidelity is not unique. The problem is broad-based, affecting all the major mutual fund companies. (Note that there is a small part of the market of SRI's, Socially Responsible Investment firms, but they are a small niche compared with giants like Fidelity, American Funds, Vanguard and Franklin Templeton.) As a result, ordinary investors, with family savings and pension plans entrusted to these financial institutions are inadvertently investing in genocide. The response from investment firms, such as Fidelity, is that they are just doing their fiduciary duty.

So, in September 2007, we expanded our campaign, seeking to engage a broader range of investment companies, educate a broader range of citizens, and effect some fundamental change in the investment community to avoid connecting ordinary investors to genocide. One element of the expanded campaign is the Basic Principle for Ethical Investing. This basic principle is absent from the operating principles of Fidelity, American Funds, Franklin Templeton, Vanguard and other major mutual fund companies, thereby allowing them to make large investments in companies helping to fund the genocide in Darfur. We began calling on mutual fund and investment companies to make 2007 the year they pledge to implement an operating principle to end investment in and profit from genocide. A second element of the expanded campaign is to submit shareholder resolutions, as broadly as possible, not only with Fidelity, but other major mutual fund companies, to help advance the cause of genocide-free investing and divesting from Sudan.

Darfur activists from Massachusetts continue to be leaders in this campaign, but they have been joined by large, growing numbers of concerned citizens and Darfur activists from around the country, in a national campaign. The chairperson for the campaign is Eric Cohen.

This campaign was kicked off in recognition of International Holocaust Remembrance Day, January 26, 2007. Save Darfur Coalition joined the campaign on May 1. Click here for more information on our partnership with the national Save Darfur Coalition.

Please join us in taking action for Darfur and for genocide-free investing. Go to InvestorAgainstGenocide.org and join us in taking action.

Press releases

Campaign communications