Global Policy Forum

By Tim Hughes and Greg Mills

Process on conflict-diamond sales gives partnership its first home-grown triumph. The Kimberley process, which resulted in the historic adoption of the diamond certification scheme, has gifted the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) its first homegrown success.

"Gifted" in that the Kimberley process was established before Nepad, yet embraces and strengthens a number of its key tenets. Adoption of the certification scheme is a tangible contribution to meeting Nepad's main requirement the peace and security initiative. The proceeds of trade in conflict diamonds have damaged individual countries such as Angola and Sierra Leone, but has also had a broader effect on contiguous countries and regions in which conflict diamonds are mined and traded.

Illicit diamonds do not cause conflict, but fuel it. In curbing the supply of, and trade in, conflict diamonds, the Kimberley process has made a small, yet significant, contribution to de-escalation of conflict and Africa's international relations.

Under the stewardship of SA, 45 countries adopted the Kimberley process certification scheme at Interlaken, Switzerland on November 5. The next step is to have the scheme adopted by the United Nations (UN) general assembly on December 6. It is planned for signatories to the process to implement the measures from January 1 next year, with a further six countries joining up during the course of next year.

The Kimberley process also marks a high point in SA foreign policy, so often accused of being chaotic, ambiguous and ineffective, and serves as a model going forward. Indeed, the process is arguably an exemplar of governmental, industry and civil society co-operation for the development and achievement of a defined foreign policy objective.

Why was the Kimberly process a success? The main reason is that there was enough common interest and consensus among governments, the diamond industry and civil society that conflict diamonds were an unacceptable phenomenon, calling for concerted action to be effectively tackled. SA's leading role in tackling conflict diamonds is consistent with a number of the key tenets of its foreign policy.

First, Pretoria has a stated commitment to a "human rights" foreign policy. The atrocities committed in wars fuelled by illicit diamond sales demanded a national response from SA. Second, SA has an avowed policy commitment to African development, renaissance, peace and security. Conflict diamonds threaten all three of these objectives.

Third, Pretoria has committed itself to act within multilateral forums wherever possible. The strong stance taken adopted by the UN has thus provided the appropriate multilateral framework for SA engagement in the process. This has been extended to engaging successfully with the Southern African Development Community on tackling conflict diamonds.

Another point of significance is the central role the foreign affairs and mineral and energy affairs departments have played in co-ordinating and managing the Kimberley process. Departmental responsibility falls directly under mineral and energy affairs and, ultimately, the minister. Crucial in SA's success in chairing the process has been the close co-operation between officials in foreign affairs which effectively acts as secretariat to the process and mineral and energy affairs, which institutionally acts as chairman of the process.

Co-operation has also been facilitated by the "technical" nature of the diamond mining sector and the need for such expertise in pinpointing the origin (and "tagging") of stones. This shows the shared interests between business and government vital to the process's success.

For it has long been the objective of the mining industry to find ways to identify the source of diamonds, enabling companies to hone their exploration and digging activities in areas identified as producing gems of high quality. Although this technical objective is some way off, cooperation from the mining houses has been essential to any agreements reached on questions of warranties and certification.

Perhaps crucial to all considerations, however, has been the role played by De Beers in galvanising the diamond industry into action. Without the personal intervention and leadership of chairman Nicky Oppenheimer and CEO Gary Ralfe, the Kimberley process would arguably not have happened. The vital role of De Beers has been noted by both UN Secretary- General Kofi Annan and former president Nelson Mandela.

What of the way forward? Once the general assembly has adopted the certification process, the main challenges will be those of adherence, compliance and monitoring. In terms of adherence the threat of conflict diamonds will remain as long as conflict remains endemic to the continent. War situations are by definition difficult to penetrate and do not lend themselves to external scrutiny. Diamonds remain an easily transportable form of currency often found in nations with threadbare regulation, control and policing and in which organised crime networks flourish.

There are also problems endemic to the diamond industry. It is a highly competitive global industry marked by high levels of secrecy. Much greater levels of transparency will be required from the industry as a whole if the provisions of the Kimberley process are to be effective. This leads to a last point: monitoring. Partnership Africa Canada, an Ottawa-based nongovernmental body, has been sceptical about process pitfalls. The essence of the critique rests on the voluntary adherence to provisions of the agreement.

The partnership says without credible monitoring and enforcement provisions in the agreement, its conclusion will create a false sense of security and achievement and will fail to effectively curb conflict-diamond sales in the market.

However, this argument tends to obscure the key reason behind the success of the process. It is axiomatic that it is in the legitimate diamond industry's interests to ensure conflict diamonds are removed from the market. Continued close business-government and intergovernmental cooperation of the sort that Nepad stands for, could make this objective, the technical challenges notwithstanding, a reality.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.