Zimbabwe’s Conflict Diamonds? The Controversy

A photo from 2006 showing miners digging for diamonds in Marange, in eastern Zimbabwe. Human rights groups say the Robert Mugabe government seized the mine by killing hundreds of prospectors and then forced countless people into hard labor(Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi, AP)

Last week, SFCG hosted a presentation by Masango Matimura about diamond mining in Zimbabwe and the controversy over whether the country’s diamonds should be declared “conflict diamonds.”  Masango, who is from Zimbabwe, has been studying in the US as part of the Hubert Humphrey Fellowship Program.  As part of his fellowship, he has been interning with SFCG’s Africa Program, where he has been researching conflict diamonds in Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe is a landlocked country located in the southern part of the African continent, between the Zambezi and Limpopo rivers. A former British colony, Zimbabwe officially gained independence in 1980. The late start to independence may be partly to do with Zimbabwe’s wealth of natural resources. The country is rich in minerals and has one of the world’s largest diamond deposits.  There are three major centers of diamond mining in the country. While there is no controversy surrounding two of them, there is disagreement about whether the diamonds mined in the Marange diamond fields are conflict diamonds or not.

While diamonds are seen around the world as symbols of wealth and luxury  they also play a role in fueling conflict; sometimes serving as a source of revenue financing insurgencies and the activities of warlords. This occurs particularly in Africa, where around two-thirds of the world’s diamonds are extracted.  For example, diamond revenue served to arm militants in the civil wars in Angola, Cote d’Ivoire and The Democratic Republic of the Congo. It is these diamonds that are known as conflict diamonds.

In recent years, the international community has made a concerted effort to halt the trade in conflict diamonds. In May 2000, representatives from several Southern African diamond-producing countries met in Kimberly, South Africa to discuss means to stop this trade. They agreed to produce certificates to accompany any diamond sold on the market to say that it is safe and not a conflict diamond. This agreement came to be known as the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme.  As of 2008, 75 countries are participants in the KPCS.

In order for a country to be a participant, it must ensure that any diamond originating from the country does not finance a rebel group or other entity seeking to overthrow a UN-recognized government, that every diamond export be accompanied by a Kimberly Process certificate and that no diamond is imported from, or exported to, a non-member of the scheme. This three step process is meant to ensure a chain of countries that deal exclusively with non-conflict diamonds.

Recently, there has been some debate about whether Zimbabwe is complying with the KPCS.  In June 2010, the Kimberly Monitor appointed to review diamond-mining conditions in Zimbabwe recommended that the country be allowed to sell diamonds from the contested Marange diamond fields as conflict-free. Two NGOs, Partnership Africa Canada and Global Witness, have called for the classification of conflict diamonds to be redefined. In December 2010, TIME Magazine published a piece discussing the newly founded rough diamond trade in Zimbabwe. The article questioned the legitimacy of the Kimberly Process stating that it was unable to prevent Zimbabwean conflict diamonds from entering the market.

Masango discussed this controversy in great detail. He noted that a diamond rush began in Marange in September 2006. By mid-December of that year, around 10,000 illegal artisanal miners were working very small plots at Marange, and an immediate water, sanitation and housing crisis developed. The miners initially sold their diamonds to the government, but a black market rapidly developed, offering better prices.

A miner scrapes through the dirt in the Marange diamond fields in eastern Zimbabwe (Robin Hammond)

By late 2008, mining was being carried out by Zimbabwean soldiers, using local villagers for forced labor. Although the revenue from the mines is officially supposed to go to the national government, in practice mining has been carried out to the benefit of certain senior officials of the Zanu-PF party. Masango noted that the diamond revenue is a boost to President Robert Mugabe, because he is under international sanctions and the diamonds provide an alternative revenue stream.

Masango gave several suggestions for possible interventions to stop this illegal diamond trade. He suggested that NGOs should push the Zimbabwean government to change its policy, through one-on-one meetings if possible. He also suggested lobbying international governments and the international diamond industry. Another important intervention would be using the media to raise awareness about the issue, both in Zimbabwe and internationally.

The controversy over Zimbabwe’s diamonds continues to this day. This week,the issue is taking center stage at a four-day KPCS meeting taking place in Kinshasa, the capital of the DRC.   African producer countries, Russia, China and the World Federation of Diamond Bourses (WFDB) have publicly stated that they support a resumption of rough-diamond exports from Marange without any new conditions. On the other hand, the United States, Europe and Australia along with influential NGOs insist that Zimbabwe still has not done enough to warrant the resumption of exports.  However, many observers expect that the tenuous barriers to the untrammeled export sale of Marange diamonds will gradually be lowered.  Such an announcement would likely trigger a backlash from from opponents of Zimbabwe’s Mugabe-led regime, resulting in a public relations nightmare for the KPCS.

In addition to trade in rough diamonds, trade in other minerals such as tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold has also come into focus as  leading to human rights abuses. These four minerals are essential in the manufacture of many electronic devices, including cell phones and laptops.  The profits from this trade finance continued fighting in the Second Congo War, and control of lucrative mines has become a focus of the fighting as well.   Recently, the Enough project, an NGO which focuses on ending genocide and crimes against humanity, released a report entitled Certification: The Path to Conflict-Free Minerals from Congo. The authors of the report, Sasha Lezhnev and David Sullivan, argue that in order to regulate the trade in these conflict minerals, it is essential to establish a certification process similar to the KPCS. However, those who are responsible for the design and implementation of this process need to learn the lessons from the issues faced by the KPCS. One of the major problems of the KPCS is that it relies on internal government controls that are often highly suspect, as in the case of Zimbabwe. In order to avoid this problem and effectively regulate the trade in conflict minerals, certification must include independent third-party auditing and monitoring.  Similarly, any future certification process must be enforceable and “have teeth.”  As the debate about the status of Zimbabwe’s diamonds demonstrates, the KPCS is not necessarily the most effective in regulating the rough diamond trade. If the international community is serious about ending the war in the DRC, than we must be serious about regulating the trade in conflict minerals.

Connect with us online!