Washington, DC — A three-day meeting of some 70 nations in Johannesburg, South Africa to discuss implementation of a plan to eradicate the trade in "blood" or "conflict" diamonds winds up Wednesday. Under a "Kimberley Process Certification Scheme," named for the South African mining city where it was launched, these nations have agreed that rough diamonds are not to be sold without a certificate of origin.
A report from a British-based non-governmental organization, Global Witness, "For a Few Dollars More, How Al-Qaeda moved into the diamond trade", claims the Al-Qaeda network infiltrated diamond-trading networks to raise funds for its operatives and launder money and is on the agenda of the Johannesburg meeting.
The coalition of governments, diamond industry representatives and NGOs that has shaped the plan, is unique. But many analysts have noted that diamonds, which depend more on image than on intrinsic value, are particularly vulnerable to public outrage. And increasingly as it became clearer that diamonds were funding some of Africa's bloodiest wars, public outrage has mounted. These conflict diamonds are estimated to account for about three per cent of the annual global diamond trade, which is worth about $7 billion a year.
Last Friday, U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation to ban the import of conflict diamonds. The stones "have been used by rebel groups in Africa to finance their atrocities committed on civilian populations and their insurrections against internationally recognized governments," he said.
But the Kimberley Process could end up failing, worry some representatives of NGOs, because there is no clear method for monitoring compliance. Currently, national governments are responsible for guaranteeing that rough diamonds are correctly processed. "Without independent checks there is a danger that any guarantees are worthless," warned Bethan Brokes of ActionAid on the eve of the Johannesburg meeting.
Another issue for the Johannesburg meeting is the delay of some countries in implementing the certification system and whether tougher penalties for those that continue to delay should be introduced.
There are also questions about whether the whole process is in conflict with the free trade requirements of the World Trade Organization.
Shortly before the Johannesburg meeting, allAfrica.com's Charles Cobb Jr. spoke with Abbey Chikane, Chairman of the South African Diamond Board and the Kimberley Process.
At this stage what is next? Can nations like Liberia or the Central African Republic participate in the Kimberley process? What about polished stones?
This is just the beginning of the process. We have competed our negotiations and have formally and simultaneously launched the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme. And the challenges ahead of us are enormous. Among other things we need to encourage all participants to pass legislation. A majority of participants have identified a designated authority responsible for the implementation of the Kimberley scheme. There are basically four other issues that we need to attend to, and one of them is the whole issue of governance -- political and economic governance, corporate governance, which to be more explicit is the rules of procedure. Now that we have set up this system we need to determine exactly how we are going to manage the Kimberley process from an administrative point of view.
The second issue is the whole issue of statistics. Different participants have various statistical methods of collecting, collating analyzing and interpreting statistics. Therefore we need to find ways and means of harmonizing our systems so that we have the same methods of calculating, collating , and interpreting statistics.
The third issue is the whole issue of monitoring. We need to see to it that monitoring of the Kimberley process is seen as credible.
And how will you do that?
First, we need to look at what we already have here and whether it is effective. If current national controls are not sufficient, then it means we'll have to begin looking at other ways and means including international monitoring.
You said there were four issues?
The last issue is the whole issue of compliance with international trade laws. A majority of us within the Kimberley process believe we are compliant, however, [regarding] those that have applied for the waiver with the WTO we believe and hope that in the near future they will be granted that waiver.
Is the WTO on board with this process?
The Kimberley process as a process does not require a WTO waiver in the sense that it's just a process. However, national governments that are participants in the Kimberley process are required to comply with international trade laws and there is general understanding within the Kimberley process that in fact we may not need a waiver because we do have a strong case which is a humanitarian case, a social security case and something we think that the WTO would definitely understand. However, as I said, there are states and regional integration organizations who feel that they may have to apply for a waiver. We have welcomed the idea and encourage them to do so. But as I speak now, we think we are very compliant with the WTO requirements.
Just explain exactly what you mean by "waiver."
There is a section in the Kimberley process document which basically stipulates that participants should not trade with non-participants. Now that is perceived to be discriminatory.
By the WTO?
Not the WTO, by some individuals within the Kimberley process. But as I say, we need to discriminate those who do not want to comply with the Kimberley process because we believe we have a good cause; it's a humanitarian cause, social security and all of that. And purely on that basis we think that we are not going to have a problem with the WTO. However, as individual participants in the Kimberley process if you feel that you would like to apply for a waiver you are more than welcome to do so. The waiver is aimed at enabling those countries who believe that the Kimberley process document is discriminatory and they would like to be granted a waiver. But we think you don't need it. South Africa did not apply for a waiver, and the reason for that is that our legislation guarantees that we comply with international trade laws and among other things it justifies the implementation of section 3 paragraph 6 of the Kimberley process [document] to say that we believe that on a humanitarian basis and because of security and safety issues we believe that we need to discriminate against these individual [countries] and they shouldn't be allowed to participate in the Kimberley process.
And what about polished diamonds, and diamonds in jewelry?
It is too far down the road to comment on now. Our mandate at the present moment is to focus on conflict diamonds for a couple of reasons. One them is that, simply, it is our mandate. Secondly, it is very easy to identify the source of rough diamonds but it can be very difficult and sometimes impossible to determine the source of polished diamonds. Hence, we think that rough conflict diamonds are easy to monitor very closely.
Would it be fair to say that when it comes to "blood" or conflict" diamonds that this is essentially an African issue?
Conflict diamonds are not an African issue. They are a worldwide issue in the sense that if it wasn't because there are markets in Europe, North America, Asia and the Middle east and Australia, we would not be concerned about this. In fact, those rough diamonds that are exported from Africa land somewhere in [these places] and this cannot be seen as an African problem; it is a global problem and it needs a global solution.
Certain countries in Africa are really notorious for their role in this. Liberia comes immediately to mind; I suppose I should lump Sierra Leone with Liberia here. We know the role that conflict diamonds have played in the ugly conflict in the region. Or Congo Brazzaville, the Central African Republic - country like the CAR is almost wholly dependent on smuggling in terms of income. How is this process going to impact them?
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
We have said that the Kimberley Process is required to accept applicants on a global basis, and on a nondiscriminatory basis. But having said that, we are mindful of the fact that there are certain individual countries that have been isolated through sanctions by the United Nations Security Council. We have made it very clear to those countries that as long as there is an embargo on them we will not be in a position to admit them into the Kimberley Process as participants. Liberia, for instance. Participation is on condition that the Security Council embargo is lifted. There was a temporary suspension of the Central African Republic which has been lifted since the coup.
And then the second category is that of countries that are seriously implicated in UN reports and NGO reports as being involved in the trade of conflict diamonds. We have insisted to those that they need to demonstrate to us that they are willing and able to implement the letter of the Kimberley process. And having received through diplomatic channels their intention to become participants we have put certain conditions: You need to pass legislation; you need to have a designated authority; you need to design a certificate and have all the security features; and you need to build an internal monitoring control system that will see to it that you are able to curb the trade in conflict diamonds. So far, we are waiting for a response from them.
How many diamond producing countries are there in Africa?
We don't have a figure because you've got lots of African countries that don't actually produce; instead, all they do is act as a conduit. Burkina Faso and Congo Brazzaville, for instance. They don't produce diamonds but they export large quantities of diamonds. So in terms of numbers it is very difficult. If you ask me how many diamond-producing countries there are, I will tell you South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, the DRC - there are very few. The rest, like Zambia, Zimbabwe, all these, don't actually produce diamonds but they trade; they source their diamonds from elsewhere. That will have to be a subject of discussion at our next plenary: Where do they source their diamonds from because they don't produce?
