IR theory and state cooperation on blood diamonds

Abstract

Blood diamonds, or "conflict diamonds," have funded rebel movements and
terrorist organizations worldwide. Bloodshed over these diamonds, the conflicts they
prolonged, and the horrific human rights violations associated with the competition for
this natural resource, resulted in an international effort to regulate rough diamonds, and
has become an issue for states, institutions, non-government organizations (NGOs),
media, and the public. Forums were held in 2001, known as the Kimberley Process, to
discuss the threat of conflict diamonds. With the United Nations' support, state and nonstate
actors devised the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), a non-binding
agreement to stop the import and export of conflict diamonds. What accounts for the
creation of the Kimberley Process? What accounts for state compliance in regards to the
KPCS? It is important to account for this cooperation because of the threat blood
diamonds pose on an individual, sub-systemic, and systemic level. Countries currently
violate the KPCS and are engaging in human rights violations and endanger the
legitimacy of the diamond industry. Success and sustainability of the KPCS is essential
to combat blood diamonds, promote human rights, and keep the industry afloat. This
paper examines the utility of four International Relations theories: realism, classical
liberalism, neoliberalism, and constructivism, to help explain the existing cooperation of
governments, industry, and civil society to address this problem. The findings indicate
the analytical limitation of these theories to explain world politics shifted by government,
industry, and civil society. All four theories are needed to explain the KPCS thoroughly.

Date of Award	2012
Original language	American English
Awarding Institution	Eastern Illinois University
Supervisor	David H. Carwell (Supervisor)