Maravi

(COMMENT) Global witness on Marange diamonds

COMMENT - More propganda from Violet Gonda and SW Radio Africa. Nowhere do they mention the very narrow 'blood diamond' definition - diamonds sold by rebel movements to fight the legitimate government - a definition that does not apply to Zimbabwe.

Global witness on Marange diamonds
by
04/07/2010 00:00:00

Human rights campaigner, Elly Harrowel of rights group Global Witness speaks to SW Radio Africa’s Violet Gonda about the failed bid to reach a consensus at the Kimberley Process meeting in Israel over the certification of Zimbabwe’s Chiadzwa diamond. Harrowel also addresses the role of KP Monitor, Abbey Chikane and the implications of Zimbabwe’s threat to unilaterally export the Marange diamonds?

VIOLET GONDA: First, tell us what happened at the (Israeli) meeting.

ELLY HARROWELL: Well as you know, the meeting in Israel was a long meeting, quite a difficult meeting. We spent a lot of time discussing the situation in Zimbabwe and whether or not exports of rough diamonds from Marange could go ahead.

We were at the negotiating table for a very, very long time. These talks went on through the night up to 5.30 in the morning and were even reconvened after the conference had officially closed.

So there were a lot of people trying very hard to find a way through this crisis but unfortunately as it stands, we weren’t able to find consensus on a way forward.

We’ve come out of this meeting still with a few questions hanging in the air but I would say that I think that the negotiations aren’t over and I think there is a lot of will on the part of all members of the Kimberley Process to try and work together over the next few weeks to find a solution to this problem.

GONDA: Right, so now as it stands, Zimbabwe is not allowed to export diamonds?

HARROWELL: Yes as it stands, there wasn’t consensus to allow exports of rough diamonds from the Marange diamond fields.

Of course the other mines in Zimbabwe are not the subject of this Joint Work Plan and so they are perfectly able to go ahead and export as normal, but there wasn’t consensus for exports from Marange, simply because a lot of participants, or a number of participants still have serious concerns regarding the situation on the ground in Marange.

The fact that not enough progress and not enough change has occurred since we got together in Swartkopmund for the plenary session last year and until some of these changes happen we can’t be confident that the diamonds being produced in Marange are compliant with the minimum requirements of the scheme.

GONDA: And I understand that delegates at the meeting were sharply divided over the Zimbabwe diamond saga and you’ve just explained why some people were still not happy to lift the ban, but why were the others happy to support Zimbabwe because I understand that countries from Southern Africa were particularly supporting this. What is the reason for this?

HARROWELL: It’s true. I think one of the key problems; one of the key reasons that countries took such differing stances was actually a lack of communication.

To give some background to your listeners on how the Kimberley Process works, the situation in Zimbabwe and the Working Plan and the report of the Kimberley Process monitor are all discussed in the Monitoring Working Group, which is a smaller group of Kimberley Process members.

Now in discussions in recent weeks in this Working Group, there hasn’t been consensus on the reports that the Kimberly Process monitor, Abbey Chikane, presented.

A number of participants weren’t happy that this report was accurate or represented all of the facts from the ground.
Unfortunately, I think the Zimbabwean delegation took advantage of this – the fact that only a smaller group has been having these discussions and somehow the report has been presented to the wider group, the wider Kimberley Process community as having been accepted.

That means obviously that some countries can’t understand why we wouldn’t be allowing exports if this report has been accepted but it hasn’t been accepted.

There are still deep concerns about the accuracy and content of it. So we’re in the situation where there is a lack of understanding of the base-line that we’re working from, I think.

However, I wouldn’t necessarily characterise the Kimberley Process as being deeply divided at this point.
One thing that became very clear through the discussions that we had and the amount of people who remained at the table at 5.30 in the morning was that there is unity in the Kimberley Process in the importance we place on trying to find a solution to this issue and there is unity on wanting Zimbabwe to become compliant with the Kimberley Process and to be able to export its diamonds once it is compliant with these rules.

So whilst there may be different feelings about the current situation and the accuracy of the information presented and the exact next steps there is a great deal of mutual understanding of the importance of this issue and a great deal of will from participants to try and find a practical and positive solution.

GONDA: And you’ve just said that there has been deep concern within the KP about the accuracy of Mr Chikane’s report. Now there’s also been serious allegations that have been raised about the monitor and people question his impartiality and that a source of his information Farai Maguwu became a target after they’d had a meeting in Zimbabwe about the situation in the Chiadzwa area. Was this brought up and if so what happens to Mr Chikane since all these questions have been raised about his conduct?

HARROWELL: Yes, we at Global Witness have been very concerned about the information contained in Mr Chikane’s report, or in fact more accurately about the information that isn’t contained in Mr Chikane’s report.

We have concerns that it didn’t reflect a lot of what is going on in the ground in terms of the military’s involvement in mining and smuggling, in terms of the very high illicit trade crossing the border into Mozambique, and in terms of on-going rights abuses carried out by State bodies.

We also had concerns about his conduct when he was on the ground in Zimbabwe about the fact that he turned up to a meeting with local civil society who as we all know, work in a very difficult context, accompanied by State minders.

This is for us is a deeply troubling thing to do. We have made those concerns very clear at this meeting as have a number of participants.

In terms of Mr Maguwu and his on-going detention, this was a matter that was raised time and again at this meeting.

Most participants here I would say have expressed deep concern at his on-going detention and it really is a question that has hung over this meeting. It drives to the very heart of the Kimberley Process.

One of the unique things about the Kimberley Process when it was set up was the way that it brought together three main parties to try and work collaboratively to solve the issue of conflict diamonds; those parties being governments, the industry and civil society.

Now if one third of the Kimberley Process, that is civil society, can’t do its job on the ground in Zimbabwe; information, with research, with news and so on, if they are then persecuted or arrested, then that really does undermine the tri-partite system at the heart of the scheme.

So yes, the question of Farai Maguwu was very much at the centre of discussions this week and I think that participants in the Kimberley Process sent a very strong message to the Zimbabwean authorities that his arrest and continued detention really isn’t acceptable.

GONDA: What about Mr Chikane? Does he remain the Zimbabwe monitor?

HARROWELL: Yes, well this comes back to the lack of consensus on the way forward.
The role of the KP monitor is part of the wider Joint Work Plan agreed between the Kimberley Process and Zimbabwe last year.
So whilst there’s no consensus on how to move forward within this Joint Work Plan it means that there’s no consensus either on how to, on Mr Chikane’s future role. So I imagine that this will be another thing that will form part of on-going negotiations over the next few weeks.

GONDA: And some have said that the KP should not have allowed one person to investigate the situation in Zimbabwe but rather sent, set out a task force. Do you agree with this?

HARROWELL: Possibly. I think it is easy to look back with hindsight on the decisions that we made in another late night session in Swartkopmund, six months ago.

Looking now, I think that we as civil society are very open to thinking creatively about a monitoring team in the future.
How can we ensure that the monitor, whether it’s one person or whether it’s a team, is getting all the information they need and is reflecting this back to the Kimberley Process.

So yes, we are very open to the idea that a team could go, or any number of more creative solutions to this issue. Of course another aspect of the Joint Work Plan is the provision for a review mission, the official Kimberley Process review mission to visit Zimbabwe.

That should have gone in March, however no invitation has been forthcoming from the Zimbabwean authorities until at least last week, but this review mission would reflect the tri-partite nature of the Kimberley Process and would also be able to play a role in finding out more about what is going on, on the ground.

So yes, a more creative monitoring mechanism may be necessary, I think that at this point the more clear and accurate information we can get from what’s going on in Marange the better it will be able to make decisions on how to move forward.

GONDA: And what has been the reaction from the Zimbabwean government in terms of the KP not lifting the ban on the exports?

HARROWELL: It’s been an interesting reaction I think.
On the one hand they haven’t walked out, they haven’t left the Kimberley Process, which I think a lot of people were worrying about beforehand.

We remain concerned about some of the language they were using throughout the week especially regarding civil society.
But the threats they have made are to instead to just unilaterally export diamonds.
What this means is that it’s not leaving the Kimberley Process but it’s reinterpreting the rules in the situation.
They’re taking the monitor’s report as fact, they’re taking it to be universally accepted and they may yet go ahead and try and export diamonds without the monitor’s sign off. We hope that they won’t do this.

We sincerely hope they will continue to work within the Kimberley Process, to work with all members of the Kimberley Process to find a solution to the situation. What will be tricky is that if they do follow through with their threats to start unilaterally exporting diamonds, it will be difficult for Kimberley Process members to refuse them.

To explain a bit about how the KP works – it’s not an international treaty organisation, it’s implemented through the domestic legislation of each member country and many of these member countries have got legislation that ties what they can and can’t do to the list of countries on the Kimberly Process web site.

So as long as Zimbabwe isn’t suspended or doesn’t walk away, then a number of countries will find it quite difficult to refuse shipments.

So I think it is going to be very important for participant countries to come together in the next few weeks and try and decide on a way of dealing with this situation.

I also think that it will be absolutely imperative that the industry steps up in the next few weeks – they’ll have a pivotal role to play in ensuring that rough diamonds aren’t leaving Marange without the full consent of all Kimberley Process members.

So really I would call on the industry to step up to the mark here and to show that they can play a very strong role in regulating the international diamond trade.

GONDA: I was actually going to ask that - can the Kimberley Process actually stop the sale of these diamonds, these Zimbabwean diamonds and is there policing for that?

HARROWELL: Whilst they remain a member, it’s a very tricky situation for the Kimberley Process to deal with.
I think it will require a creative solution and that’s something actually the Kimberley Process has often been quite good at working out, creative solutions to problems.

It’s a relatively young scheme and so quite often we are working on issues that are within the Kimberley Process unprecedented and we are trying to, having to find a way forward as issues arise.

And as I say, I think that central to the response, central to the ability to regulate the flow of Marange diamonds that haven’t been approved by the Kimberley Process will be the industry, will be the cutting and polishing industry in different countries around the world, will be the trading industry and they are really going to have to think long and hard about how they respond to this issue.

GONDA: Are there people right now who would be interested in dealing with the Zimbabwean government before the situation has been resolved within the Kimberley Process? Are there people in the world who actually go along with this right now?

HARROWELL: Well I think it’s quite clear that all the time that we’ve been talking about Marange, Marange diamonds have been reaching the international markets.

There is a very brisk trade in diamonds from Marange across the border into Mozambique to Vila de Manica.
One of my colleagues from a different civil society organisation, recently visited Manica and counted 30 diamond trading houses, trading in diamonds from Marange.

So evidently even now, even six months ago when we first put this Joint Work Plan into place, there were people out there willing to trade in Marange diamonds and to accept Marange diamonds into the international system.

So this is really an issue that has been on the table for a while but I think now it will become sharply into focus and Kimberley Process members, governments, industry, civil society are going to have to sit down and work out how they can deal with people who are willing to go outside the KP consensus.

GONDA: Right and of course the Zimbabwean government is saying that it’s a bunch of westerners who are making complaints as part of their regime change agenda. What can you say about this?

HARROWELL: I would completely refute those accusations. The Kimberley Process is at its heart, a technical scheme.
It is an import/export certification scheme based on very technical requirements. Now the reason we, and I would say that other governments as well, the reason that they haven’t been happy to give the go-ahead for exports from

Marange at the present time is simply because the technical requirements of the Kimberly Process in Marange as a whole remain unfulfilled.

We still, as I mentioned at the start of the programme, there are still real issues with smuggling over the border, there’re still issues with the internal controls in Marange when you have the people who are meant to be ensuring internal controls in fact running syndicates and driving the illicit trade – then that represents a real problem to compliance, to Zimbabwe’s compliance with the Kimberly Process.

So no, this isn’t to do with regime change, this isn’t to do with western governments ganging up on someone, it’s, I think that’s a very clear attempt on the part on Mr Mpofu to divert attention from the issues at hand and the issues at hand are technical issues, they are technical areas in which Marange, and operations in Marange as a whole, do not comply with the requirements of the scheme then how can we allow these diamonds to be exported?

How can we assure consumers that they are getting a clean diamond at the end of it?
GONDA: Do you think that the KP has handled the Zim saga effectively since technically the government can still sell the diamonds since it hasn’t even pulled out of the KP?

HARROWELL: Yes it’s a difficult one to answer. I think the Kimberley Process has been to a certain extent, feeling its way through this crisis.

The Joint Work Plan which was decided last year was an unprecedented step, never before has the Kimberley Process attempted to look just at one producing area in the country instead of looking at the country as a whole and evidently, this new approach which civil society still remains somewhat sceptical about.

We’re not sure that the country should be able to pick and choose the areas in which it is compliant with the rules and section off different areas that aren’t.

But that aside, the Kimberley Process has been working in an unprecedented manner and I think there has been teething problems and issues that perhaps weren’t envisaged at the start when we were negotiating this agreement that have perhaps made the application of the Joint Work Plan, the collaboration of Zimbabwe and bringing them back into compliance, more difficult or more complicated than was first envisaged.

I think that’s the nature of dealing with situations as they arise in a creative way.
Sometimes you don’t quite foresee all the issues that might end up on the table, but I would come back again to the point that whereas it’s been very difficult, whereas negotiations were tense and fraught and difficult, there are still a lot of people remaining at the table, there are a lot of people who want to see this situation resolved, who want to see Zimbabwe in compliance exporting its diamonds for the benefit of the Zimbabwean people so there’s still a lot of will to see this through and see it to a positive conclusion.

GONDA: And in terms of the value of the diamonds does the Zimbabwe government stand to lose or make more from dealing on the black market as compared to if it was dealing as a registered KP member?

HARROWELL: Yes I think that the Zimbabwean government wanted to stay in the KP and want to deal legitimately simply, if you deal on the black market, you don’t get as good a price for your goods and we want the Zimbabwe government to deal legitimately.

Dealing on the black market won’t allow very valuable diamond wealth to start flowing into the State coffers and to start rebuilding the Zimbabwean economy and funding education and health care and all the things that are so vital to the ordinary man on the street in Zimbabwe.

So we would very much urge the Zimbabwe government to stay in the KP to work with everyone who has been working very hard over the past few years, the past few days to get Zimbabwe on the right track because by selling diamonds legitimately they’ll get a better price and that money will go to helping the Zimbabwean State get back on its feet. Selling on the black market is very much a less positive option for them I would say.

GONDA: And is it possible to trace the diamonds sold on the black market to find out where they came from?
HARROWELL: The difficulty with the Kimberley Process is that as a scheme it only applies to rough diamonds and not polished diamonds, so once a diamond reaches a cutting and polishing factory in say India or Dubai or China or Antwerp, as soon as it’s cut, you lose the ability to trace it.

That means it can go anywhere in the world from that moment on and end up in any market, any jewellery store and the consumer won’t know where it’s come from.

The key is for the KP to be looking at this at the source, for people to be acting on that first link in the chain to stop the exports coming out from Zimbabwe because that’s the only place actually the Kimberley Process as a scheme has leverage is on the rough trade.

We have long been campaigning at Global Witness to extend the statistical oversight of the Kimberley Process to include cutting and polishing centres so that participants would be able reconcile figures of what’s going in to polishing centres and what is coming out and make sure that there isn’t an illicit stream of diamonds also going in and getting laundered into the process.

I think the situation we have right now highlights why such a move would be so important but for the time being the KP still only has oversight over the trade in rough diamonds and once they get to a cutting and polishing centre they are lost to the oversight of the Kimberley Process.

GONDA: Earlier on you mentioned that it’s only the diamonds from the Chiadzwa fields that have been affected. What is the situation with the other diamond mines in Zimbabwe?

HARROWELL: Yes the Joint Work Plan that was agreed at Swartkopmund last year was only meant to address problems in Chiadzwa Marange diamond field; that actually is in itself quite an unprecedented step for the Kimberley Process because it doesn’t normally subdivide countries into different regions.

The other diamond fields are two mines in Zimbabwe, River Ranch and Murowa and as far as we know, things seem to be going pretty well at those mines; they haven’t posed any challenges in recent years to the compliance of Zimbabwe with the Kimberley Process.

GONDA: So as human rights groups you have done investigations into the mining activities of these other two diamond mines in Zimbabwe?

HARROWELL: No we as Global Witness haven’t run any investigations into activities at Murowa or at River Ranch. They haven’t really come up on the agenda that much.

GONDA: Why is it though that people are concentrating on Marange?

HARROWELL: Well there’s an interesting question about the kind of diamond deposit found at Marange as opposed to at the other mines.
Marange is what we call an alluvial diamond field which means the diamonds are very easy to get at, they are near the surface and can be got with quite low grade technology – digging and sifting and so on.

The other two mines in Zimbabwe aren’t mines of this type and so they don’t represent the same problems of securitisation and so on.

To give you some context, the classic diamond-fuelled war that we saw in places like Sierra Leone and Liberia involved diamond fields of the alluvial type so they really have been the ones to pose security challenges and have unfortunately provoked in a lot of cases a very brutal response from the authorities.

GONDA: What’s the next step after this meeting?
HARROWELL: Well I think the important point to retain is that negotiations, at least from our point of view and I think from the point of view of most people around the table, aren’t over.

I think it’s very important that Kimberley Process members continue to engage with Zimbabwe and I absolutely urge the Zimbabwean government to respond, to work with members of the Kimberley Process and absolutely to work with civil society in a constructive and a collaborative manner to find a way forward that is amenable to everybody.

I think, I believe from the Kimberley Process chair’s final statement, that he is looking to convene a meeting in the near future to get everyone back together to try and discuss how we can move forward and we very much hope that such a meeting could find a way to resolve this situation.

Perhaps when everyone around the negotiation table has had a little more sleep than we have had this week.
I think it’s important to us to reflect on what’s happened this week in Tel Aviv.
It’s been a really hard week for everyone involved; the negotiations we’ve had have been difficult and draining and we’ve also had on-going concerns and worries about our colleague Farai Maguwu who remains in prison, but we don’t think that this is the end.

We very much think that the Kimberley Process still has more work to do and there can still be on-going negotiations that we will be taking part in wholeheartedly in order to try and find a resolution. 


GONDA: Thank you very much Ellie Harrowell. Thank you for speaking to us.
HARROWELL: You’re welcome, it’s been a pleasure. Feedback can be sent to violet@swradioafrica.com

Labels: BLOOD DIAMONDS, KIMBERLEY PROCESS, MARANGE DIAMOND FIELDS

posted by MrK @ 2:13 PM