De Beers created the need for diamonds in American culture. Their ad campaign solidified the diamond being a symbol of love and commitment. They persuaded the audience to believe that a diamond is rare and expensive, when it really had no intrinsic value.
In the 1990s there was an influx of diamonds into the market thanks to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The more common way of mining diamonds is through shaft mining. In Africa, diamonds were mined easier due to alluvial mining. Alluvial mining meant that diamonds could be mined from water beds.
The diamonds were so easy to mine, that anyone who found them would make a fortune. Militias and Rebel groups like RUF took over the diamond rich territories. They forced locals into servitude to perform hard labor, or risk losing limbs, family members, or their own lives.
De Beers process until this point was to buy diamonds through long- term contracts. They then put the diamonds in inventory. They selectively sell a small amount of the inventory to preserve the rarity of the diamond.
De Beers experienced an influx in surplus. De Beers received a lot more supply, but still only sold the same amount. The renegade groups amped up the procurement of diamonds through terrorism and violence. Many people died through VS suffering and strife, and it appeared De Beers profited from it without insight.
1)To What Extent is DeBeers at Risk? To What Extent is DeBeers Responsible? 2) Identify the Key Actors 3)Is there a mechanism that can stop the supply of conf lictdiamonds, end the killings, and restore order to the market? How should it be enforced?4) Are there ways to get around (loophole) the mechanism?
De Beers is at risk to the DeBeers is responsible to extent that it only acted the extent that it profited when it was on the public and stored diamonds in stage, a whole decade the course of these after it started. It is at African countries’ strife, risk of losing a consumer that it turned a blind eye base it solely built over to the situation and the lack of corporate benefitted for 10 years, social responsibility. and only forfeited 60% of their “loot”.
Rebel and terrorist groups, including the infamous RUF. Government Victims of terrorism in the African countries, like Angola, Sierra Leone, and Liberia. NGOs and special interest groups Kimberley Process Nations Private parties and individuals
In 2000, a conglomerate of countries, companies, government and individuals of South African diamond-producing states created the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme for rough diamonds to prevent conflict diamonds to influx into the mainstream market. Diamonds that originate from a Kimberley Process country do not finance rebel groups. Each diamond parcel must have a certification slip, Each diamond parcel must be in a tamper proof container, No diamond is imported from or exported to a non-member nation. If you disobey these guidelines, you will be punished with an embargo. No trade of diamonds can occur if you violate the guidelines. This is harsh if it is your nations main industry.
Country could possibly sneak them into packages that are certified conflict-free. The Kimberley Process is highly disorganized with a rolling leader, sharing responsibility nation to nation, year after year. The disorganization of the KP can be undermined. Some other critics have said that the system doesn’t truly stop conflict diamond mining or help people. It merely takes a portion of the power away from them. They can still sell the diamonds in the black market.
Tylenol scare happened in the early 80s. Someone poisoned bottles of Tylenol. It caused many people to fear Tylenol and quit buying. Johnson & Johnson ripped the product off the shelves at a cost of over 20 million. They are applauded for their handling of the situation, and reintroduced the product with new bottles.
Johnson & Johnson De Beers Immediately reacted to Turned a blind eye, and the scandal as it let the situation fester. happened. Took the product out of Recalled all the products the inventory over a that were associated with decade after it started. the harming of people They gained money, and They lost money, but lost respect. They are gained resounding still trying to get back to respect and patronage where they were.
Everyone in the diamond industry must be conflict- free. Ethics became a stronger proponent to the purchase of diamonds. Ethically, DeBeers was wrong, but legally it was fine. They had an easy and a difficult route. De Beers chose the easy way. In my opinion, it is too little too late.