Orano warns of financial problems at Niger uranium plant
The West African nation increasingly seeks new partners, such as Russia, in its mining sector.
Kimberley Process (KP) leader Gillian Milovanovic is proposing a new definition of conflict diamonds to include acts of violence and broader human rights issues, she said in a statement.
The document argues that “an updated definition could apply to diamond-related conflicts that meet generally agreed-upon standards of armed conflicts, such as a resort to armed force between States or protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a State.”
“This would also apply to circumstances of systematic violence, such as protracted and violent internal disturbances and tensions, grave acts of violence or acts of a similar nature over an extended period.”
This clarification, reports Idex Online, responds to concerns by countries worried that internal issues may be used as an excuse to exclude them from KP on political grounds. Among them are most large diamond countries – Russia, China, Israel and most African countries – all mine, trade or manufacture diamonds.
It also echoes concerns from industry players, such as London jeweller Ingle and Rhode’s. The company said in April that the current standard was not up to snuff and used an infographic to explain why.
“The Kimberley Process only addresses diamonds produced in areas controlled by rebel militias. It doesn’t take into consideration violence committed by government forces,” said Tim Ingle from Ingle and Rhode.
KP has received a vast range of suggestions for the new definition. “Some are controversial, others seem to raise more questions,” concludes the document.
Comments
Melesmeles
Israel is right to be concerned about a review of the definition of a
conflict diamond that results in the banning of all diamonds that fund
gross human rights violations. The present definition of a “conflict
diamond” only applies to rough diamonds used by rebel groups. This
allows cut and polished blood diamonds to evade the regulations and they
are sold to unsuspecting consumers labelled as conflict-free diamonds.
Evidence given to the London session of the Russell Tribunal on
Palestine in Nov. 2010 indicated that revenue from the Israeli diamond
industry generates over $1 billion in funding for the Israeli military
each year. The Israeli military stands accused of serious war crimes and
possible crimes against humanity by the UN HRC.
While the US chair of the KP has indicated that she does not favor an
broadening of the definition of a “conflict diamond” to include cut and
polished blood diamonds, public pressure to eliminate the trade in all
blood diamonds will ultimately force the jewellery industry to isolate
diamonds from countries where revenue from the diamond industry is
funding gross human rights violations by government forces.