Conflict Diamonds in the early 2000s, a common concern emerged among members of an oddly matched group : the diamond industry, the united nations, several goverments, and human rights campaigners. All wished to end the trade in conflict diamonds, gemstonesthat are mined or stolen by rebels fighting internationally recognized goverments.
The $6 billion a year diamond industryhas long been dominated by the De Beers Corporation. Founded in south Africa by Cecil Rhodes in the 1880, the beers strategy has been to own as many diamond mine as possible and to sell its rough (uncut) stones exclusively to a small group of preferred dealers at prices set by the company. To maintain its control over supply, De Beers operated buying offices all over the world, “sweeping up” diamonds produced in mines operated by others. The result, for many years, was a virtual monopoly.
De Beers has also been a shrewd marketer, pouring millions of dollars over the years into advertising. Using the slogan “a diamond is forever”, the company cultivated and association between diamonds and romance. The company first promoted solitaire engagement rings, later, it shifted its marketing focus to the so called eternity ring, a band of multiple smaller stones aimed at older married couples.
In the early 1990s, event in several diamond-rich African nations converged to tarnish the gem’s carefully cultivated image of love and purity.
During the cold war, many partisans in civil conflicts in Africa received funding from either the united states or the soviet union, both anxious to maintain alliances in the nonaligned developing world. After the collapse of the soviet union in 1991, this source of funding largely dried up. Accordingly, some combants began to seize control of valuable mineral resources to finances their operations.
The situation was particularly gruesome in sierra leone, a small