Policing 'blood' diamonds: the watchdog Kimberley Process explained

What is the Kimberley Process?

Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi/AP
Abbey Chikane of Kimberley Process shows the certificate awarded to Zimbabwe following their granting of a Kimberley Process certification in Harare, Aug. 11, 2010.

It’s a United Nations-backed certification program meant to ensure that none of the world’s diamonds are so-called “blood diamonds” – that is to say, stones mined by rebel groups and used to fund armed resistance movements.

The program came about in the early 2000s amid rising international awareness that rebel groups in Angola, Sierra Leone, and the Congo were mining diamonds under horrific conditions and then using the profits to wage bloody wars against their governments.

At the time, the global diamond supply chain was frustratingly opaque. Required only to carry a certificate from the last country they were exported from, many diamonds smuggled from conflict zones quickly disappeared into the international market, their origins unknown. As a Monitor report described the situation at the time:

The journey of an African diamond to a newlywed's finger is a long and often tortuous one. From high-security mines in peaceful Botswana or muddy pits in Congo, the rough, dull stones travel in pockets or planes through jungles and over deserts, eventually landing in cutting and polishing centers in New York, Antwerp, and Tel Aviv. Often, they pass through the hands of several middlemen in different countries, making it difficult to track their original origin.

When they reach glass display cases in the US - which makes up more than half of global diamond jewelry retail sales - they all sparkle. It is impossible to tell which are stained with the blood of African civil wars.

In 2003, dozens of nations signed on to an agreement officially known as the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, which required that all diamonds bound for international markets be certified as conflict free.

1 of 3

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.