Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Diamond Producers Meet on 'Conflict Diamonds'
WINDHOEK - Rights abuses in Zimbabwe diamond fields are set to dominate talks opening Monday by the global system charged with preventing trade in the gems from fuelling armed conflicts.
Calls for an international ban on Zimbabwe's diamond sales are set to dominate this week's meeting of the global body set up to prevent trade in "blood diamonds", in a key test for the regulatory regime. (AFP) Zimbabwe poses a key test for the international scheme known as the Kimberley Process, named after a South African mining town, under mounting criticism for failing to effectively stem the trade in "conflict diamonds".
Civil society groups which are part of the process are demanding the suspension of Zimbabwe's international diamond trade, after a Kimberley team documented "horrific" abuses by the army against civilians in the eastern Marange diamond fields.
"At the meeting ... KP member governments must agree to suspend Zimbabwe from importing and exporting rough diamonds," said Annie Dunnebacke from Global Witness, a British group that monitors exploitation of natural resources.
Also on the agenda are concerns about smuggling from Ivory Coast, after the United Nations last week extended an arms and diamond embargo on the west African country.
A UN report found increased diamond exploitation in the north of the country, an area still under the military control of the Forces Nouvelles group of former rebels.
"Ivorian conflict diamonds continue to be exported in spite of UN sanctions and are laundered into the legitimate KP trade through neighbouring states and international trading centres -- including both member and non-member countries," the UN report said.
Concerns over the effectiveness of the Kimberley Process have mounted, and reform of the group's consensus-based decision making is also set to be discussed during the four-day meeting in the coastal Namibian town of Swakopmund.
Kimberley was dealt a hard blow to its reputation when Ian Smillie, one of the architects of the process, resigned from its governing body last May.
"I am leaving because I feel that I can no longer in good faith contribute to pretence that failure is success" he said in a farewell letter.
"I thought in 2003 that we had created something significant. In fact we did, but we have let it slip away from us," Smillie was quoted as saying by Diamond Intelligence online.
"Problems are shifted from one internal 'working group' to another... and there is no voting," he said. "Nobody takes responsibility for action or inaction, failure or success and nobody is held responsible."
Smillie now heads the Diamond Development Initiative, an organisation that helps small-scale diamond miners.
Other countries of concern are Lebanon and Guinea, which were exporting significantly more gem-quality rough diamonds than they import, Global Witness said.
The Kimberley Process covers about 99.8 percent of the world's production of rough diamonds, with 49 members representing 75 countries working within the scheme.



6 Comments so far
Show AllThey can manufacture diamonds of superior clarity, hardness, and quality in the laboratory for significantly less effort and money than mining them. I don't understand why that development hasn't killed the diamond mining industry...
Would that be the same UN report that is talked about here?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1124668.html
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
What is the POINT of diamonds anyways? Their "value" is a reflection of little more then "scarcity by design".
Some people live on less then two dollars a day barely enough to buy food and water.
Some people spend 4000$$ on a diamond to show how much in love they are.
Its nuts.
As someone who was engaged in the jewelry business for decades, I should point out that the info that "They can manufacture diamonds of superior clarity, hardness, and quality in the laboratory for significantly less effort and money than mining them" is incorrect for jewelry grade stones. While possibly true for industrial grade diamonds, gem quality stones have not yet been produced in certain sizes and most are not colorless, and none are of superior hardness. Prices for true synthetic diamond do not offer any great cost savings.
That said, the Kimberly process, while well intentioned, has always been more of a marketing tool than a true solution. And before you switch to a colored gemstone in protest, consider the abuses related to them as well. Colored gemstones from Burma,Sri Lanka, East Africa, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are associated with so many different abuses and conflicts it would be difficult to account for them here. Simulated and true synthetic stones? Often produced in Chinese sweatshop conditions.
All mining operations have the potential to be ecological disasters, especially those associated with precious metals production, necessary for a finished piece of jewelry.
For those that choose not to contribute to these situations, consider vintage jewelry, where the abuses are far in the past, or consider recyled gold and gemstones from certain sources you approve of, such as Canadian diamonds.
As long as mooches will pay more for a certain "pretty rock" this problem will go on.
Canadian diamonds don't reflect the land claims disputes between the canadian government and the first nations of the land where the diamonds are recovered.
I haven't heard any outcome of the disputes with the Nishnawbe Aski Nation over the diamond mines near James Bay. I haven't heard of any disputes with first nations in the NW Territories, over the mines near Yellowknife, which is not to say there aren't any. I also can't imagine any mining in that area that would not make a mess of some kind either.
Hopefully, the outcomes will be better than mineral disputes in the United States, where the presence of gold, oil, uranium, or anything else of value has normally been a curse for native peoples when their land was involved, although history seems to disprove that hopeful theory every time.