Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 November 2009
The efforts of American activists to pressure Asian corporations in Sudan have to date resembled a struggle to find the light switch in the dark, or swimming against a strong current. While the impact of the divestment campaign in the United States has been increasingly evident, its effectiveness in producing actual results in Sudan remains suspect. Thanks to China and a trio of Asian national oil companies, oil still flows in Sudan. The campaign's activities have failed to incorporate Sudan's wider international political and economic relations into its strategy. It has rather paradoxically sought to pressure state-owned corporations through financial market divestment. The nature of its Asian targets, reluctant Western investors and a distracted American government have obstructed the campaign from having a resounding impact in Sudan.
An earlier version of this article benefited from the comments and critique of several seminar discussions; special thanks to Dan Large and Jago Salmon for their input.
BBC News (London); Boston Globe (Boston, MA); Financial Times (FT, London); Fortune Magazine (New York); Indian Express (New Delhi); International Herald Tribune (IHT, Paris); Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, CA); New York Times (NYT, New York); Reuters News (London); Wall Street Journal (WSJ, New York); Washington Post (Washington DC).
Divestment analyst and divestment senior field organiser, Sudan Divestment Task Force, telephone interview, 23.10.2007.
Divestment senior field organiser, Sudan Divestment Task Force, 29.11.2007, Copenhagen.
Oil official. Ministry of Energy and Mining, 21.1.2007, Khartoum.
Procurement manager, the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC), 27.10.2007, Khartoum.