"Conflict diamonds" and “Blood diamonds”

How did a gem as beautiful and remarkable as a diamond, most often associated with love and romance, come to be called by such a disturbing name as “blood diamond”? Like any item that is small, portable and of internationally recognized value, diamonds can be used for evil as well as good. “Conflict diamonds,” or “blood diamonds,” are diamonds illegally traded to fund conflict in war-torn areas, especially central and western Africa. The countries most often associated with conflict diamonds are Sierra Leone, Angola, Liberia, the DRC, and the Ivory Coast. Diamonds from these countries are often smuggled across the borders and sold to fund the purchase of weapons. The atrocities committed against the populace of these countries are what gave rise to the term “blood diamond.” This term will become much more commonly heard with the December release of a movie, starring Leonardo diCaprio, which goes by the name “Blood Diamond.” In the story, set in Sierra Leone in the early 1990’s, diCaprio plays a South African mercenary who learns of an extraordinary uncut pink diamond in the hands of a man played by Djimon Honsou, who was forced to work in the alluvial diamond fields. The thriller follows their journey through rebel territory.

When mined responsibly, diamonds, like any natural resource, can return a tremendous amount of good to a country. Botswana, for instance, has one of the highest per-capita incomes in Africa, thanks to its diamond mines. When a natural resource is used irresponsibly, that income often goes to fund despots or rebels for sometimes horrendously violent and disfiguring control of the population.

At one time, conflict diamonds may have accounted for as much as 4% of the world diamond trade. Today, thanks to efforts within the international diamond community, in cooperation with many NGOs, they account for less than 1% of the diamond trade. 1% is still too much, but it is a noticeable improvement since the period in which the film is set. The goal of the international diamond industry is to stop the trade in conflict diamonds altogether. If this film brings more attention to the subject, resulting in more attention being paid by government agencies, it will have a positive result.

This reduction in the trade of conflict diamonds has been accomplished through the development of the Kimberley Process, a system of warranties developed by the international diamond community which follows a diamond from its emergence from the ground to its final destination in a retail store. At each step in the process, the diamonds are warranted to have been mined through legitimate, organized channels. Today, 69 countries have accepted the Kimberley Process into law. While there is still improvement that can be made, it is gratifying to see the unity in the international industry.

Diamonds are by no means the only natural resource used to fund conflicts. Other precious gems and metals have been used in similar ways, as have many resources from our earth.

You may have heard suggestions that all diamonds, or at least all African diamonds, should be boycotted until the African conflicts are resolved. One of our key diamond suppliers is a cutter from Johannesburg, a South African native. In his words, “Africa is struggling to gain economic traction. Anyone advocating a ban on African products is not speaking for Africa.” Boycotting all diamonds would affect far more than the countries committing the atrocities; it would severely affect the economies of Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa, to name a few.

Diamonds should be mined responsibly, and the income should go back to benefit the diamond producing country. And diamonds, or any gems, should be treasured for their natural beauty and emotional symbolism.