In an impromptu speech yesterday to about 350 students and faculty gathered outside his Yard office, President Derek C. Bok defended the University's investment policy and blasted students for their lack of interest in "exerting some significant force" to help Black South Africans.

Bok also said that he supported the decision of President of the Board of Overseers Joan T. Bok '51 to send a controversial anti-divestment mailing to alumni. A letter included in that mailing cautioned alumni against voting for three divestment candidates on this year's ballot for the Overseers, which is one of Harvard's two governing bodies.

The Southern Africa Solidarity Committee (SASC) had invited Bok to appear and participate in what became a lively and at times heated half-hour interchange with divestment activists in front of his Massachusetts Hall office starting at 3 p.m. yesterday.

The invitation was made through a petition, reportedly signed by 2000 students and faculty members, which called on Bok to make a public appearence and to divest of Harvard's $416 million in South Africa-related stock.

Defending Harvard's stance against total divestment, Bok said it is unlikely that such an action would benefit the cause of Black South Africans, but that it would likely compromise the independence of the University. He said he was disappointed that divestment activists targetted Harvard rather than Congress in the fight to punish the South African government.

"We failed [to get sanctions enacted] by three votes, and more support from the student community could have made a decisive difference," Bok said. The president lobbied last spring for a bill to economically penalize South Africa for its refusal to dismantle the system of apartheid.

Bok also defended Joan Bok's decision to send the letter with election ballots urging alumni not to change the way the Overseer body works and not to vote for the three alumni campaigning on a divestment slate.

"I support that letter," said Bok, "I think it is a fair letter," he said, adding that he will prepare an indepth statement on the subject by to appear in Friday's Harvard Gazette. Drawing hisses from the audience, Bok said, "That's all I want to say on this point."

Students and alumni have criticized Joan Bok's move as in-house electioneering and have called for the invalidation of the election.

Venturing out of Mass Hall with an entourage ofHarvard officials and police officers to thecheering crowd, Bok said, "Good afternoon. Howwould you like to proceed?" He received amicrophone and presented a short statement on theUniversity policy.

Robert Weissman '88, a SASC member, thenfielded questions to Bok which audience membershad written out and passed to Weissman.

Bok argued throughout the session that thechances that total divestment would put pressureon the South African government and affect achange in that nation are "banishingly small."

Divesting would also threaten the autonomy ofHarvard, said Bok. "When you start to do that[divest], there are a lot of things which you mayhold dear that are going to be in jeopardy," saidBok, adding that corporation might attempt toexert economic and political influence overpolicies of the University if Harvard were toattempt to do the same over them.

Drawing boos and hisses from the audience, Bokresponded to a question about what he would havedone in the case of Nazi Germany. He said that hewould ask the same questions that he asked aboutSouth Africa. "I do not believe I would haveemerged from that situation advocating totaldivestment," he said.

"It is unlikely that Adolph Hitler would havegiven up his plans to proceed," he said.

Weissman asked Bok, "What's your logic oftelling them [Black South Africans] that theydon't know what's good for them?" Theshirt-sleeved president responded, "I am not awareof any evidence that Black South Africans havetaken the position that you suggest."

When Weissman interjected, "Tutu?" Bok said,"Let me finish my answer to your question." Hecited a poll conducted last December in which 24percent of the Black South Africans surveyed werein favor of total divestment and 48 to 49 percentin favor of selective divestment.

"If we got a large majority of Blacks in somereasonably reliable poll, I think it is animportant factor to be taken into consideration indeciding if it would be wise" for companies todisinvest from South Africa, said Bok.

But he said that even if Blacks in South Africawere shown to oppose a U.S. corporate presence inthat country, such opposition would notnecessarily cause Harvard to divest, only topressure companies to withdraw their operations.

Philosophy

Harvard's current policy is to divestselectively of stock in South Africa-relatedcompanies that do not take steps to improve thecondition of Blacks, but to work to encourage mostcompanies to improve their policies rather thandivest. In its history, Harvard has divested offive South Africa-related companies.

Responding to a question asking if it is not acontradiction that Bok is reluctant to useeconomic leverage on companies by total divestmentbut continues to support a policy of selectivedivestment, the president said there is a largedifference between total and selective divestment.

Bok drew a distinction between trying to push acompany to action by applying the economicleverage of total divestment and not associatingwith some delinquent companies which have policieswhich offend the University.PhotoAdam Ruderman