JUST two years ago diamonds were set to go the way of fur, transformed in the public imagination from a mark of glamour to an emblem of cruelty. African warlords and rebel leaders were waging ferocious civil wars armed with Kalashnikovs and rocket launchers bought with illicitly mined diamonds. And as campaigners and journalists reminded people almost daily, many of these blood or 鈥渃onflict鈥� diamonds were ending up in high-street jewellery shops and on the fingers of unsuspecting brides in the West. A devastating consumer boycott seemed to be on the cards.
The boycott didn鈥檛 happen. Instead, the diamond industry agreed to negotiate a protocol designed to make it harder for dealers to conceal the geographical origins of diamonds mined in rebel-held regions. The protocol was a terrific PR coup for the industry. Unfortunately it will not stop the murderous trade.
There will be no inspections of companies to verify compliance. Legitimate diamond mines will not be audited. Conflict countries will not be monitored. We will simply have to trust them all to issue certificates accurately. And why? Because the diamond industry fought long and hard to water down the protocol before agreeing to sign it.
Advertisement
This is not surprising. The diamond industry is notoriously secretive, and although it is willing to do what it can to stamp out conflict diamonds, there are strong suspicions that it is less keen to act against other types of illicit diamonds. By no means all diamonds smuggled out of countries like Angola and Sierra Leone are conflict gems. Most come from legitimate mines and are traded on the black market simply to avoid taxes鈥攁nd many of these are inevitably bought by dealers working for the big diamond companies or their subsidiaries. US trade officials say a lack of reliable information about how many diamonds are mined legitimately and exported from different countries is handicapping attempts to restrict smuggling. It is hard to ward off the cynical thought that the diamond industry likes it that way.
Now the industry has a golden opportunity to prove such cynicism wrong. Forensic geologists are developing non-destructive methods for tracing the geographical origins of diamonds (see 鈥淒iamond Wars鈥�). It might one day be possible to use these technologies to carry out spot checks on suspicious diamonds. The threat of such checks is exactly what the current agreement is lacking.
But progress will crucially depend on researchers being able to compile databases of diamond samples from all mining areas, including those in conflict countries. Western governments could look at ways of getting samples out of West Africa for research purposes, possibly under the auspices of the UN. And the diamond industry itself could also help by providing what West African diamond samples it holds and co-operating with the researchers. Nobody can make the industry do this. But if it doesn鈥檛, it鈥檚 only a matter of time before consumers become suspicious again.
