How to comply with nearly the impossible, and who to hire to help do it?
A new U.S. law requires public companies that make personal electronic devices to audit the materials used in their products and make these findings public. This supply-chain challenge presents a daunting task and hopefully a human rights mechanism to encourage the private sector to do the right thing.
Most of the readers of this website know that many of the metals and minerals found in today’s personal electronics (e.g. smart phones, mp3 players) have the strong possibility of being extracted from Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and/or its adjoining countries. For years, bloody conflicts and intra-state wars have been waged in this region, in fact the United Nations’ largest peacekeeping operation (18,000 personnel) is in the DRC, likely fueled by mining profits. Advocacy groups and both governmental and NGO human rights organizations have been trying for years to develop a foreign policy to end these conflicts and defund the warlords. However, with India, China, EU and other countries involved in exporting raw materials from the region, the right mechanism was hard to find.
However, on July 21st, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, otherwise referred to on TV as the financial reform bill. Deep inside on page 851, in section 1,502, the document reads, It is the …”Sense of Congress that the exploitation and trade of conflict minerals originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is helping to finance conflict characterized by extreme levels of violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly sexual- and gender-based violence, and contributing to an humanitarian situation therein…”. The document then goes on to require the companies to…”exercise due diligence on the source and chain of custody of such minerals, which measures shall include an independent private sector audit of such report submitted through the [sic. Securities and Exchange] Commission that is conducted in accordance with standards established by the Comptroller General of the United States, in accordance with rules promulgated by the Commission, in consultation with the Secretary of State.”
Very wordy, but these few paragraphs will force many “manufacturers to overhaul checks on their supply chain in an attempt to identify any “conflict minerals” that can be traced back to the Democratic Republic of the Congo or adjoining countries”, as Jean Eaglesham and Jeremy Lemer of the Financial Times reported earlier this week.
The law will affect thousands of companies. The Congo region is a widely used source of important industrial metals and minerals such as tantalum, copper, germanium, gold, manganese and cobalt. Tantalum, for example, is used in very small amounts in crucial electronic components such as capacitors, which find their way into everything from cars, to personal computers and mobile phones.
Regardless of the good intentions and valid policy goals of the law, the challenge still remains to verifiably trace the origins of these ingredients across oceans, refineries, shipping companies and through jungles to dangerous mining regions
Who can do this work? Supply-chain audit experts probably have not tackled a problem as complicated and dangerous as this one before. There also is a chance though, that the makers will simply disclose that their products contain materials from the Congo region, address any public relations concerns that arise and move on. The next implementation steps are likely to be costly and require very specialized firms to do the work. When the law goes into effect in 2012 it will be interesting to see the findings and learn who and how they produced the reports.
About as Juicy as Diplomacy Gets
International diplomacy got really interesting this week as celebrities, UN resolutions, Cold War espionage and diamonds splashed news headlines around the world.
A court room sketch of the spies
1. Running a close second place in the news cycle, only behind the Gulf oil spill relief effort, the US completed an intriguing round-up and swap with Moscow of 10 Russian spies living in America. Very swiftly after their capture, the 10 were traded for 4 individuals tied to western intelligence gathering efforts who sat in Russian jails. Facebook profiles, romantic encounters and disbelief from those who knew the deep-cover agents reignited Cold War nostalgia with a modern twist and increased online readership across many news outlets. Politico.com actually appears to have hit its monthly high right after the story broke. (source: Quantcast)
2. The island of Cyprus’ normally bland and now 36 year old smoldering civil war also got a celebrity spark this week, when Jennifer Lopez decided to cancel a concert in the Northern Turkish Republic of Cyprus due to public pressure. She was due to perform on July 24 for the opening of the Cratos Premium Hotel and Casino in Kyrenia, a beach resort town on the northern side of the island.
The beautiful harbor of Kyrenia, Cyprus won't be the newest exotic concert location for JLo
A statement posted on her website read, “Jennifer Lopez would never knowingly support any state, country, institution or regime that was associated with any form of human rights abuse…After a full review of the relevant circumstances in Cyprus, it was the decision of her advisors to withdraw from the appearance. This was a team decision that reflects our sensitivity to the political realities of the region.”
The conflict has spawned UN resolutions, peacekeeping missions and international court cases since the island split violently into a Greek-speaking south and Turkish-speaking north after a 1974 invasion by Turkey. In 1983, Turkish Cypriots declared the north’s independence, but Turkey is the only country that has recognized the region’s status. Meanwhile, the internationally recognized southern Greek Cypriot side of the island joined the European Union in 2004, further growing the economic development inequalities between the two sides. Remarkably, some saw J Lo’s planned performance as an endorsement of the breakaway state’s legitimacy – a bit of a stretch if you ask me. However, a week on the island in 2005 certainly taught me how seriously Cypriots, both southern and northern, take seemingly little things like this.
3. Lastly, the British supermodel Naomi Campbell announced through her PR firm this week that she will testify as a witness in the war crimes tribunal of Charles Taylor. Taylor, the former leader of Liberia, was captured while on the run by UN peacekeepers in Nigeria in March 2006. He is accused of mass murder, rape and mutilation, including financial support for rebels in Sierra Leone civil war that cut off the limbs of their civilian victims. Taylor, 62, is also accused of destabilizing Liberia and several neighboring countries while amassing a personal fortune from illicit trade in diamonds, guns and timber.
Charles Taylor, the former leader of Liberia, was captured while on the run by UN peacekeepers in Nigeria in March 2006. UN Photo/Mathew Elavanalthoduka
Campbell is being ordered to testify because, according to another celebrity, Mia Farrow, she accepted an enormous rough-cut diamond from Taylor when the two met at a house party hosted by Nelson Mandela in 1997. Farrow, who was also at the party, says Campbell told her about the gift soon after it was presented to her. The supermodel had previously avoided questions on the matter and said she did not want to be involved in the war crimes trial at The Hague, Netherlands. However, after the court issued a subpoena on July 1, ordering her appearance, she faced a prison term of up to seven years, a fine of about $500, or both, if she failed to appear.
International diplomacy probably won’t get this sensational again for a while.
Brazil and Turkey vote “no” on UN Resolution
Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, Permanent Representative of Brazil to the UN, raises her hand during a Security Council meeting, indicating her “NO” vote on resolution 1929 (2010), a document imposing new sanctions on Iran for its refusal to suspend nuclear enrichment activities. The resolution passed 12-2 with Brazil and Turkey voting no, Lebanon abstained.
UN Photo/John Mcilwaine
Nuclear ‘Deal’ brokered by Brazil and Turkey will likely not save Iran from added sanctions.
UPDATE June 9, 2010: In response to Iran’s suspect nuclear program, the UN Security Council has approved new sanctions targeting the country’s powerful Revolutionary Guard, ballistic missiles and nuclear-related investments.
Original Article: Although quickly forgotten, it momentarily seemed as if real historic progress was being made on May 17th this year when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clasped hands with Brazil’s and Turkey’s leaders at a signing ceremony over the country’s nuclear enrichment programs. This week, that celebratory agreement appears to have done little to delay or prevent a new round of economic sanctions from being placed on Iran by the United Nations Security Council. UN Security Council watchers expect a vote on additional sanctions to be called later this week.
Short-lived celebrations. Iran, Turkey and Brazil celebrate the nuclear fuel swap deal in Tehran Photograph: Atta Kenare
After several months of Iranian courtship and a few hours of intense negotiations, the draft agreement last month between Iran, Brazil and Turkey ended with Tehran agreeing to send 1,200 kilograms of its 3.5 percent enriched uranium over to Turkey in exchange for a total of 120 kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) to produce medical isotopes. While this swap mimics a similar deal offered by the UN P5+1 (US, UK, FR, RU, CH, GER) last October, the amount of low enriched uranium being exchanged does not reflect the fact that Iran has produced much more low enriched uranium (LEU) in the 8 months since then. While 1,200 kg constituted nearly 70 percent of Tehran’s total estimated LEU stockpile last October, the same amount today makes up just over half its current estimated total of about 2,300 kg. The deal immediately received skeptical responses by American and Russian leaders when it was announced.
Brazil’s ambassador to Turkey, Marcelo Jardim told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review today that the “Iranian deal represented important progress, although not as much as desired by some countries.” Ambassador Jardim also credited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Brazil in November 2009 as one of the reasons why Brazil sought to become involved in the Iranian negotiations. For the past several months, Iranian leaders have been earnestly visiting several of the non-permanents members of the Security Council, in order to gather support in opposition of another sanctions resolution – including Uganda, Lebanon, Gabon, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Further demonstrating how seriously Iran is taking the threat of additional sanctions, Iran’s ambassador to the UN invited all 15 UN Security Council members to dinner in New York last month to possibly avert any action in the Security Council.
On Sunday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she expects Iran will “pull some stunt in the next couple of days” as a UN vote looms, according to Lachlan Carmichael (AFP). Asked what she expects in the run up to a UN Security Council vote on sanctions on Tehran over its controversial nuclear program, Clinton said “I expect Iran to pull some stunt in the next couple of days.”
Asked if she were worried about non-permanent UN Security Council members and emerging powers Brazil and Turkey not backing sanctions, Clinton said: “We’ll wait and see what happens, but we have the votes.”
Pressed as to whether she meant for passage of new Iran sanctions at the UN, Clinton said: “Yes.”
First hand account of Israeli attack on Gaza aid convoy at sea
On June 3, 2010, Bülent Yıldırım, president of İHH İnsani Yardım Vakfı, spoke to the media regarding the events aboard the ship the Mavi Marmara during the Israeli attack on the aid convoy. The text of his statement is available to read in Turkish on the website of Radikal, a Turkish newspaper. Below is an English translation of his account of the events. (Translation by Anna Wood.)
Mavi Marmara, one of the ships in the flotilla. CC/FreeGaza
There were people from over fifty countries. Among our friends there were a total of thirty-five parliament members, plus many politicians, intellectuals and journalists. We set out with a total of nine ships. A few of the ships were sabotaged along the way. They could not continue. We waited in the sea for a few days. Then we went on with the ships we had. Actually, like all of you, we never sensed that Israel would interfere with us violently. And we couldn’t understand it. Because Israel was saying, “I’m going to come with my whole fleet.” The Israeli press was continually calling us. There was live broadcasting. We were being called from every corner of the world. Among us there were Christians, Jews and Atheists. We were together with people of every belief. We actually never entered Israeli waters. In fact, this was a first in world history. They announced an open-ended operation. They said this as the place of shooting. They said 68 miles. When we looked at our radars, we saw this was a fictional operation. Because the ships were wandering around. Despite this we went in 80 miles. We went in international waters. But Israel did not understand this. Tomorrow or the next day our captain will speak.* We will bring out the documents. Our destination was Egyptian water, to enter Gaza from Egypt. There was nothing to attract their [Israeli] interest.
Despite this, all of a sudden Zodiac ships began to appear in great numbers around us. Helicopters, F16s, five large warships and submarines. We broadcast again. They at least wouldn’t do something this unintelligent, we thought. When the call to prayer was read in the morning, we stopped to pray. Then we realized that they were attacking us from the air, from underwater, from boats, all of which were uncountable. We said to each other that they were just putting on a show. If we had been in their waters, if we had been in waters where pirating actually illegally occurs, or if we had been in Palestinian waters, then they would be able to attack us, we said. Then all of a sudden they began to land. Our friends committed solely civil resistance. The whole press was there. Arm in arm we said, don’t let them in. Then we saw that entering arm-in-arm wasn’t working. While the Israelis interrogated me, I made them a promise. I am a resolute man. When I make a promise, I keep it. For three days they questioned all the units. They asked me, “Are you thinking of attacking us with those irons and axes?” I answered, “You were attacked with irons and chairs. It was legitimate self-defense.” I said I would explain this. I give you my word. In the press conference I will say that our friends defended themselves with the bats they saw there.
At first they were saying they didn’t use weapons. Supposedly they got permission to use weapons, meaning real bullets, in the 35thminute. Well, you immediately threw sound and gas bombs. Pieces of the bombs you threw came off. Most of our friends were wounded. Isn’t this a weapon? We did the statistics. Of the first bullets they shot, two were plastic. One of them resembled a nail. Our brother Cevdet – may God give patience to his loved ones – he was martyred. Our brother Cevdet was a member of the press. While the Israelis were firing above, he was only taking photographs. He was shot from just one meter away, and his brain was in pieces. This wasn’t enough. We realized that news of martyrs was coming from every side. We saw that the bullets they had started shooting were real bullets. Plastic bullets kill, too. Because you’re firing from 1.5-2 meters away. They started shooting real bullets.
