Blood Diamonds
Tracking diamond mining across the globe through the Kimberley Process and the future of unfriending this deadly resource.
Diamonds are a girl’s best friend? Not for long as diamond sales plummet and the true nature of resource extraction is revealed. Here’s hoping that more people pay attention.
Since the 2006 film, Blood Diamond, it’s become more apparent that this gemstone is used to finance violent rebel groups and terrorist organizations.
Being undetectable at airports and easily laundered from high-conflict areas to the Middle East and onto Europe and the United States, this silly Western habit of being distracted by shiny objects - that get people tortured and killed - is certainly one that needs to die.
Amid an interconnected system of actors like states, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), multinational corporations (MNCs), and civil society in the case of conflict diamonds, the Kimberley Process presents a variety of challenges as well as opportunities for success.
“The Kimberley Process (KP) is a multilateral trade regime established in 2003 with the goal of preventing the flow of conflict diamonds. The core of this regime is the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) under which States implement safeguards on shipments of rough diamonds and certify them as “conflict free”.”
However, there appears to be major discrepancies between international agreements like the Kimberley Process and the realities of implementation.
The Kimberley Process emerged from a convergence of actors promoting rule of law, transparency, anti-corruption, and human rights. Its three main pillars – government, industry, and civil society – appear to promote ethical trade and social responsibility.
The challenges and successes of the certification scheme has highlighted the importance of international problem-solving in a globalized world as well as ongoing checks in efficacy that include tackling flaws in its own system. In addition to identifying systemic discrepancies, implementing sound solutions to an evolving system remains a challenge.
Some of the notable challenges of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme is that it endorsed sites that were engaging in egregious human rights violations, certificate forgeries, MNCs interfering in regional stability, and government corruption.
For example, the Kimberley Process has certified diamonds from sites in Angola and Zimbabwe that were embroiled in human rights abuses. Locals have been subjected to torture, rape, amputations, and other assaults by military forces in addition to facing eviction from their own lands and homes. While NGOs have reported numerous flaws in the certification process, they have often struggled to find a way to raise enough leverage against each actor to trigger enforcement of Kimberley Process objectives.
MNCs also use their power to influence regional, state, and local politics and manipulate environments for profit. It’s difficult to verify diamond origins, regardless of their potential roots in regional conflict. MNCs are cognizant of the systems on the ground and can navigate accordingly to include laundering diamonds to its main markets - primarily the United States.
On the other hand, in terms of successes, the Kimberley Process has aided countries in ending diamond-related conflicts and reduced unethical trade from 15 percent in 2003 to less than 1 percent in 2018.
Opportunities for improvement can be seen in upcoming diamond industry disruptors. Online sales, lab-grown diamonds, and consumers’ growing demand for ethical products are set to affect diamond exports in top-producing countries. This offers some hope for the future.
Additionally, NGOs have the opportunity to highlight one of the main upcoming disruptors to the market – consumer concern over human rights and conflict diamonds – by investing in public relations campaigns to ensure awareness of ongoing human rights violations committed by MNCs or government officials.
A sharp Netflix documentary wouldn’t hurt either.
Another opportunity for success is using technology to reduce corrupt influence via blockchain technology. Such technology would ensure certified origins and avoid forgeries or other means of human manipulation in the documentation process.
Per the Kimberley Process website, forgeries appear to be an ongoing issue. By closing existing gaps from awareness to technology, we could potentially see reductions in conflict-induced migrations, MNC interference, human rights abuses, and state corruption.
A meaningful conclusion that can be drawn about governing the global system is that liberal institutions like the Kimberley Process, while flawed, can maintain confidence and legitimacy through transparency and accountability. Has this collaboration in the Kimberley Process between state and non-state actors been successful? To a degree.
It appears the successes in reducing violence and developing a framework to reduce corruption and human rights abuses have had a positive impact.
Amid all the challenges, the Kimberley Process has the potential to address defects by implementing the appropriate technology to reduce corporate or human interference. NGOs could also provide additional pressure through raising public awareness of ongoing human rights violations. But we’ll sit tight to see if the opportunity is seized.
