The real source of blood diamonds
The story featured on the front page of the Financial Times of October 7, 2006, read: CONFLICT DIAMONDS 'SMUGGLED INTO GHANA'. It referred to a draft United Nations report due to be submitted to the UN Security Council this week. It found that diamonds from rebel-controlled areas of la Cote d"Ivoire are being smuggled into Ghana, violating United Nations sanctions and an international industry-wide certification scheme.

Conflict diamonds, it is alleged, routinely enter the market by being sold by rebel groups to dealers in Ghana and elsewhere, with a panel of experts from la Cote d’Ivoire accusing Ghana of aiding rebels in that process.

Decreasing the trade in conflict diamonds in a diamond-producing country minimises the ability of rebels to fund violence. Conflict diamonds, are diamonds illegally traded to fund conflict in war-torn areas, particularly in central and western Africa. The UN defines conflict diamonds as "...diamonds that originate from areas controlled by forces or factions opposed to legitimate and internationally recognized governments, and are used to fund military action in opposition to those governments, or in contravention of the decisions of the Security Council.” These diamonds are sometimes referred to as “blood diamonds.”

Diplomatically, being considered a conduit for conflict diamonds from rebel-held areas of la Cote d’Ivoire is very embarrassing news for Ghana for so many reasons. First, Ghana has been at the forefront of efforts to bring peace to la Cote d’Ivoire.

Second, Laurent Gbagbo has always been suspicious of Ghana as having a rather soft touch for the northern rebels. This news is not likely to improve his estimation of our impartiality.

Third, we are on the Security Council as non-permanent members. That same council is expected to announce this month a resolution designed to break the political impasse in the neighbouring country’s fragile peace process and decide how it should be run after a UN-backed transition expires at the end of this month.

Fourth, Kofi Annan, the Ghanaian Secretary General of the UN whose ten-year tenure ends this year, was instrumental in getting the Kimberly Process against blood diamonds off the ground in 2000.

But, there are also direct economic difficulties attached to this. Already, the World Diamond Council, an influential industry association committed to keeping the industry ‘clean’, has written to the chairman of the Kimberly Process certification scheme, demanding that the certification body place a temporary ban on all rough diamond exports from Ghana.

We are pleased with the sharp response from the Minister of Mines, Land and Forestry, Dominic Fobih, who Wednesday, rejected accusations leveled against Ghana in the UN draft report.

Prof Fobih, was quoted by the international media as saying: “The allegation is a complete shock and disturbing development to the government and people of Ghana”, adding that Ghana’s rough diamond exports had remained constant since 2002.

In 2000, a coalition of governments, non-governmental organisations and the diamond industry worked together to address this very issue. In 2002, they established the Kimberley Process Certification System, a UN-backed process that has virtually eliminated the trade in conflict diamonds. Today, over 99 percent of the world’s supply of diamonds is said to be from sources free of conflict.

Diamondfacts.org is dedicated to presenting the facts about conflict diamonds, along with how diamonds are driving economic growth and prosperity in countries around the world. The UN Security Council subsequently imposed an embargo on diamond exports from la Cote d’Ivoire, which it accused of being heavily involved in trade in conflict diamonds.

It was at the World Diamond Congress in Antwerp in 2000 that the international diamond industry created the World Diamond Council and announced the industry’s zero tolerance policy towards conflict diamonds. The World Diamond Council worked to help create and implement the Kimberley Process, and is still working to support and improve it.

In addition to and in keeping with the industry’s determination to eradicate conflict diamonds, the World Diamond Council and its members agreed to provide assurance-to all purchasers up to final sale-that the diamonds being sold were from conflict free sources. This assurance, called the ‘System of Warranties,’ involves a written statement on all invoices declaring that, to the best of the supplier’s knowledge, the diamonds are from conflict free sources.

The majority of today’s diamonds are sourced from Africa, Canada, Russia, Australia and South America, with 65 percent of the world’s diamonds being produced in African countries. Diamonds have had a very paradoxical effect on Africa, boosting living standards and fanning conflicts as well, especially in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and DR Congo. On the positive side, diamond revenues enable every child in Botswana to receive free education up to the age of 13. When measured by value, Botswana is the biggest producer of diamonds in the world ($3.2 billion annually). The diamond mining industry generates over 40 percent of Namibia’s annual export earnings. $8.4 billion worth of diamonds a year come from African countries. 65 percent of the world’s diamonds come from African countries. As Nelson Mandela said in 1999, “The diamond industry is vital to the southern African economy.”

Conflict diamonds captured the world’s attention during the extremely brutal conflict in Sierra Leone in the late 1990s. During this time, it is estimated that conflict diamonds represented approximately 4 percent of the world’s diamond production. The problem may have gone down today, but Ghana cannot afford to be seen as acting in an irresponsible manner in this matter. The UN report exposes the difficulties in policing our borders. We are, however, of the view that the real problem here is the Ivorian President. If Gbagbo would see sense and allow peace and elections a chance, it would sweep any semblance of legitimacy right from beneath the boots of the rebels. And, where there is no conflict, you cannot have conflict diamonds and countries like Ghana, being accused of breaching the Kimberly Process. Gbagbo may choose to attack France and the UN for being the cause of his current predicament, but his resentment towards UN Resolution 1633 (adopted October 2005) diluting his powers, does not make the document a bad one for his country.

Resolution 1633 constitutes a combined African Union-UN peace road map, only made difficult by the likes of President Mbeki, who seem to have little appreciation of the difficulties Gbagbo is posing in our subregion.

We urge the UN Security Council not to allow Gbagbo to remain in office beyond the stipulated one year which ends this month. The condition that the country holds “free, fair, open and transparent” elections is far from being fulfilled. But, what Gbagbo has shown is that he is incapable of bringing lasting peace to his country. La Cote d’Ivoire needs a transitional authority, without Gbagbo at the helm. Such an authority can have a ten-month mandate for disarmament and elections. The level of bad faith is too high for anything positive to come under the current arrangement.

Gbagbo's belligerence, real cause of blood diamond

In today"s editorial, The Statesman argues that it can appreciate the embarrassing situation that Ghana, a non-permanent member of the UN’s Security Council, and a leader in the push for peace and security in neighbouring la Cote d’Ivoire, is in now after being accused of serving as a conduit for conflict diamonds from rebel-held regions in la Cote d’Ivoire.

But, rather than the world focusing on the apparent breach of the Kimberly Process certification scheme on blood diamonds, the Security Council should force Laurent Gbagbo out, if there is going to be any hope for a lasting peace in the country.

This paper argues that the one year that was given to President Gbagbo and the rebels to implement UN Resolution 1633 is up by the end of this month. The failure to implement major aspects of 1633, such as rebel disarmament, redefinition of the country’s policy on citizenship and the holding of free and fair elections by this time, in our view, offers overwhelming evidence that Mr Gbagbo’s leadership cannot be trusted or expected to return stable and peaceful democracy to our cousins next door.

We are therefore calling on the UN to use this month’s special Security Council deliberation on the matter to push for a transitional government in la Cote d’Ivoire without Mr Gbagbo at the helm of affairs.

The level of bad faith between himself and the rebels is too serious for anything constructive to come out of his continued leadership of the country. Without conflict in la Cote d’Ivoire, there would be no conflict diamonds and therefore no breach of the Kimberly Process.