PoliticsDRC: Congo devastated: 'conflict-minerals' finance terrorists
Business & Human Rights (Aug31,2k11)
How Congress Devastated Congo
07 Aug 2011
The...Dodd-Frank [Law]...includes an obscure provision that requires public companies to indicate what measures they are taking to ensure that minerals in their supply chain don’t benefit warlords in conflict-ravaged Congo...Unfortunately, the...law has had unintended and devastating consequences...The pastor at one church told me that women were giving birth at home because they couldn’t afford the $20 or so for the maternity clinic. Children are dropping out of school because parents can’t pay the fees...Meanwhile, the law is benefiting some of the very people it was meant to single out. The chief beneficiary is Gen. Bosco Ntaganda...Ostensibly a member of the Congolese Army, he is in fact a freelance killer with his own ethnic Tutsi militia, which provides “security” to traders smuggling minerals across the border to neighboring Rwanda. All this might be a price worth paying if the law were having its intended effect of economically asphyxiating the warlords who turned eastern Congo into the deadliest conflict zone since World War II...But...[t]he law has not stopped their depredations. [refers to Apple, Intel]
What Conflict Minerals Legislation Is Actually Accomplishing in Congo [DRC]
09 Aug 2011
Ending the world's deadliest conflict is no easy task, but a growing consensus of Congolese civil society, electronics and metals companies, investors, and governments are now taking action to do so. A chief driver of their work is the Dodd-Frank legislation on conflict minerals, which is why a coalition of 40 Congolese human rights groups called it "the leverage needed to instill and impose ethical business practices in the Great Lakes region." David Aronson's op-ed "How Congress Devastated Congo," misses the critical link in eastern Congo: the continuing role of the minerals trade as a fuel for violence and a major source of revenue for armed groups and military units responsible for atrocities. The Dodd-Frank legislation is the first policy initiative to start to change that equation in 15 years.
[PDF] Global Witness response to David Aronson’s article on the Dodd-Frank Act
17 Aug 2011
For the past decade and a half, the trade in metals that power our laptops and make our cell phones vibrate has helped to fuel the devastating war in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The Dodd Frank Act…is a groundbreaking measure that aims to cut off a major source of cash for for abusive armed groups in the region…Business lobby groups are pulling out the stops to ensure that these regulations are delayed or diluted...As Mr Aronson’s reporting and our own recent research in eastern Congo shows, the international demand for Congolese minerals is currently at a low ebb...The idea that the Dodd Frank Act amounts to a long-term embargo is not correct, however. Indeed...the past few weeks have seen major international companies unveiling plans to invest in and source from mines in areas of Congo covered by the law...Other positive effects of the law are being felt.
A Conflict Over ‘Conflict Minerals’
15 Aug 2011
To the Editor:...In fact, the United States government should be commended for its leadership in trying to regulate “conflict minerals” and to starve rebels of the resources and weapons they need to kill and rape...The “conflict mineral” provisions of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, which put the burden on companies to know and disclose the source of their supply, are a small but vital step in shifting the incentives away from the warlords...David Aronson’s attack on the Dodd-Frank law’s provisions on “conflict minerals” does not tell the full story...As a Congolese civil-society advocate, I have seen how the Dodd-Frank legislation on “conflict minerals” provides “the leverage needed to instill and impose ethical minerals business practices,” according to a coalition of Congolese human-rights groups.
Ignore the naysayers, restrictions on DRC conflict minerals remain vital
10 Aug 2011
A string of recent media comments have argued that a piece of US legislation aimed at ending conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) actually hurts civilians….[They] all make the…point…that requiring companies to identify the source of their minerals will drive investment away from the DRC and keep people poor. It is a familiar argument…It is also…wrong…[M]inerals from the DRC provide revenue for armed groups to buy weapons to continue fighting. Eastern Congo, where these minerals are found, is an area where murders, massacres, rapes, and other acts of gender-based violence are widespread. According to Global Witness, companies from around the world…are working to extract the region's precious resources. To gain access, they must deal with commanders accused of ordering mass atrocities. This exposes them to potential criminal liability and complicity in rights violations….The challenge for companies working in the DRC…is to develop measures which ensure they source from entities not party to conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment