The Irony of the African Diamond Charity Campaign

In a recent article from the BBC news, Edward Zwick, the director of the Hollywood film Blood Diamond, was highly critical of the US diamond industry’s newest charity campaign. The US diamond industry will donate $10,000 to an African charity for every movie star who raises his or her hand, wearing a diamond ring, during Hollywood events like the Oscars. This campaign is ironic to many, including Zwick, because illegal diamond profits have been funding wars in Africa for years. This charitable campaign is also suspicious because Zwick’s film illustrates the atrocities of the violence in Africa funded by diamonds. Many in the diamond business have expressed reservations that the film will reduce the demand for diamonds.
Those in the diamond industry will be quick to point out that nearly 99.8% of new diamonds come from conflict free sources compared to 4% in the late 1990s. Personally, I feel as though the diamond charity campaign is a bad idea. Even the smallest percentage of diamonds coming from violent African areas can still create large profits. Furthermore, the money donated to the African charities many not necessarily halt the violence and the promotion of diamonds by Hollywood starts will only increase the demands for diamonds. Thus, with a greater demand for diamonds, there is a greater chance that diamonds will come from the violent areas of Africa and will fund these African wars.