Rubies and jade are helping to keep Burma's junta afloat.
This past fall, the world watched in horror as brutal
military rulers reasserted their control of Burma by chasing protesting monks
from the streets of the country's capital. And the junta had help from a
powerful ally: the American consumer. Burma produces more than 90 percent
of the world's ruby and jade. According to Human Rights Watch, the
state-controlled Myanmar Gems Enterprise pocketed nearly $300 million from the
gem trade last year. That represents a 45 percent increase in profits from the
previous year. And it makes gems the government's third-largest revenue
source--one of the chief means by which Burma's junta arms the soldiers it
deploys against monks, minority ethnic groups, and just about anyone who
questions its ruthless rule.
If this situation--a group of sadists relying on the sale of
valuable gems to fund their violence--sounds familiar, it should. A year ago, the film Blood Diamond, directed by Edward Zwick (a former TNR intern), showed audiences how diamond buyers inadvertently
funded a brutal rebel group in Sierra
Leone during the 1990s. But there is one key
difference between African diamonds and Burmese gems: By the time Blood Diamond came out, the diamond
industry had already been shamed into accepting a system of regulations that make it difficult
for conflict diamonds--diamonds whose sale bankrolls violence--to land on the
shelves of American jewelry stores, and around the necks of unsuspecting
buyers. By contrast, to this day, ruby and jade from Burmese mines--which NGOs
have described as rife with unsafe working conditions and child labor--continue
to pour into the United
States.
It wasn't supposed to be this way. A round of sanctions
passed in 2003 banned Burmese imports, including ruby and jade. But there was a
catch: Not long after the sanctions became law, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection issued a ruling declaring any gem that passed through a third
country to be "substantially transformed" and therefore no longer of
Burmese origin. Most gems from Burma
were already being exported uncut to countries like India,
Thailand, or China
for polishing and mounting. So the decision from Customs effectively rendered
the ban on Burmese gems moot.
Fortunately, the loophole may be about to close. Last week, the
House of Representatives passed a bill sponsored by California Congressman Tom Lantos that would ban the import of gems originating in Burma--whether or
not they have passed through another country. (The EU, which along with the United States and Japan,
purchases about 85
percent of Burma's rubies, has already passed similar sanctions.) What's
more, even before the bill had passed, a number of large jewelry
retailers--such as Sterling,
Tiffany's, and Cartier--had voluntarily agreed to stop purchasing Burmese gems.
Still, the issue is far from resolved. The bill has yet to
pass the Senate and go to President Bush's desk. As a result, in the midst of
the holiday season, Burmese ruby and jade continue to enter the United States.
While a group called Jewelers of America--representing 11,000 jewelry
retailers--has called on its members to ban Burmese gems, many stores continue
to stock them. The group's director of public affairs, Peggy Jo Donahue,
explains that it has instructed members, "You don't want to buy
gemstones that are mined in Burma."
Still, she adds, "We don't have a mandate to require those things."
If the Lantos bill becomes law, of course, those stores will no longer have a
choice. But for now, Donahue has one suggestion for customers who want to be sure they're not buying Burmese ruby and jade: "Ask if their jeweler has a policy." Moreover, even if the
loophole is eventually closed, other steps will still be needed. For instance,
the United States should pressure countries like Thailand and China (the
largest importer of Burmese jade, which has reportedly been buying it in increased
amounts for products commemorating the 2008 Olympics) to stop buying the
stones.