India snubs De Beers

The diamond conglomerate had made efforts to have the gems sold through its channels in which the prices are predetermined.
On several occasions De Beers has been accused of diamond price fixing and anti-trust behaviour.
Analysts contend that for De Beers the stakes are high. The firm, which controlled 95 percent of the market a century ago, now controls about 40 percent.

But since Zimbabwe sold its high-quality gems to India it gave Indian traders exclusive rights to better cut, polished, quality and high price diamonds.
De Beers had reportedly already convinced all regional mines to sell their diamonds through its channels, which was strongly resisted by Zimbabwe.
Similar manoeuvres to exclude Botswana gems from global markets resulted in a partnership between De Beers and the Botswana government to form Debswana.

De Beers are said to have a vendetta against Zimbabwe after Government expelled them for failing to formally exploit Marange diamonds.
Government feared that millions of dollars could have been externalised during a lengthy period in which De Beers claimed to be doing “research” on the diamonds.
As a result, it is reported that De Beers had been working with other international bodies and Western governments to have Marange gems labelled as “blood diamonds”.

This was despite the fact that Kimberley Process had approved the sale of Marange diamonds at a recent meeting of members in the DR Congo. KP, a group of diamond producers, regulates international trade in the stones.
Among the critics who supported the “blood diamonds” tirade are the Rapaport Group who are trying to establish themselves as the best indicators of global diamond prices.

The group claims to be “the primary source of diamond prices and market information”.
Its activities include publishing, research, marketing and Internet information.
It also specialises in “diamond trading networks, global rough and polished diamond tenders, certification, quality control, compliance, shipping, and financial services”.

A couple of months ago, Rapaport’s attempts to persuade the Indian media in Mumbai to oppose trade in Zimbabwe diamonds was roundly criticised by many journalists who thought it was not fair to make such charges.
Indian diamantaires believe prices and trends by Rapaport are influenced by De Beers, therefore giving the conglomerate the latitude to prop up the prices of the diamonds it wants to promote over the gems it wants excluded.

But managing director of the Rapaport Group Martin Rapaport vehemently denied this, declaring: “We are an independent trading and listing exchange.
“Marange diamonds are sanctioned by the US and EU governments out of concern that they will fund such abuse. While such diamonds are legal for trade in India, they are not ethical diamonds and should be avoided.”

He urged India to separate Marange diamonds claiming they were used to aid human rights abuses, which India would perpetrate by trading in the gems.
“The Rapaport Group is a US entity and will not tolerate the listing of Marange diamonds on its trading networks for ethical as well as legal reasons,” he says.
Earlier, vested interests tried to use the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to seize rough diamonds from Marange, as the US had sanctioned them.

But India’s Gems and Jewellery Export Council lauded its Government’s decision to allow trade in the gems as that creates scope for trade. It says that gives room for huge employment opportunities for India.
Zimbabwe has potential to account for about a fifth of supplies to international markets. Its gems are generally bigger and of better quality than others.Business Reporter
DE BEERS’ bid to exclude Marange diamonds from international markets flopped after major global trader India cleared trade in the local gems.

De Beers had reportedly already convinced all regional mines to sell their diamonds through its channels, which was strongly resisted by Zimbabwe.
Similar manoeuvres to exclude Botswana gems from global markets resulted in a partnership between De Beers and the Botswana government to form Debswana.
De Beers are said to have a vendetta against Zimbabwe after Government expelled them for failing to formally exploit Marange diamonds.

Government feared that millions of dollars could have been externalised during a lengthy period in which De Beers claimed to be doing “research” on the diamonds.
As a result, it is reported that De Beers had been working with other international bodies and Western governments to have Marange gems labelled as “blood diamonds”.
This was despite the fact that Kimberley Process had approved the sale of Marange diamonds at a recent meeting of members in the DR Congo. KP, a group of diamond producers, regulates international trade in the stones.

Among the critics who supported the “blood diamonds” tirade are the Rapaport Group who are trying to establish themselves as the best indicators of global diamond prices.
The group claims to be “the primary source of diamond prices and market information”.

Its activities include publishing, research, marketing and Internet information.
It also specialises in “diamond trading networks, global rough and polished diamond tenders, certification, quality control, compliance, shipping, and financial services”.

Indian diamantaires believe prices and trends by Rapaport are influenced by De Beers, therefore giving the conglomerate the latitude to prop up the prices of the diamonds it wants to promote over the gems it wants excluded.

Earlier, vested interests tried to use the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to seize rough diamonds from Marange, as the US had sanctioned them.
But India’s Gems and Jewellery Export Council lauded its Government’s decision to allow trade in the gems as that creates scope for trade. It says that gives room for huge employment opportunities for India.

Zimbabwe has potential to account for about a fifth of supplies to international markets. Its gems are generally bigger and of better quality than others.