The notion of U.S. universities divesting from Israel has sparked quite the debate, with economist Robert Stein emphatically stating that such a move is “almost impossible” to execute. In an insightful interview with Fox News Digital, Stein debunked the idea that universities could easily disentangle themselves from Israeli-affiliated companies through divestment strategies. The crux of the issue lies in the fact that many universities have investments in index funds, which encompass a wide range of stocks, making it impractical to filter out Israel-related businesses. Stein humorously pointed out that finding a fund devoid of Israeli stocks would require the creation of a whole new market dedicated to such specific criteria – a Herculean task, to say the least.
The economist highlighted the logistical challenges that would arise if universities were to heed the call for divestment from Israel. He explained that abandoning index funds in favor of individual stocks or narrow indexes would not only be cumbersome but also more costly for the institutions involved. The prospect of universities completely divesting from Israel and its affiliates has led to speculations about potential tuition hikes. While some fear this outcome, Stein reassured that the structure of endowments would mitigate such drastic measures, thereby minimizing the likelihood of tuition increases.
Drawing from his extensive experience at the Department of Treasury and the Senate Budget Committee, Stein emphasized the impracticality of divesting against Israel. He underscored that the underlying issue is not just about divestment itself; rather, it reflects a larger predisposition to find fault with Israel and target Jewish communities. Stein’s candid assessment sheds light on the complexities surrounding divestment movements and the broader implications they carry. The economist’s insights serve as a reality check for those advocating for divestment, urging a more nuanced understanding of the economic mechanisms at play.
As the discourse on divestment continues to unfold, Stein’s expert analysis offers a sobering perspective on the feasibility of such endeavors. The intricacies of investment strategies, coupled with the broader geopolitical implications, underscore the challenges inherent in implementing sweeping divestment policies. While the debate rages on, Stein’s pragmatic evaluation serves as a timely reminder of the complexities involved, prompting a more informed dialogue on the intersection of economics, politics, and social activism.
By
