Diamond Wars? Conflict Diamonds and Geographies of Resource Wars

Abstract

In the late 1990s, natural resources such as oil, diamonds, and timber came under increased scrutiny by conflict analysts and media outlets for their purported role in many contemporary wars. This article discusses some of the limitations of conventional arguments linking wars and resources. Dominated by econometric approaches and rational choice theory interpretations, arguments pertaining to "resource wars" often oversimplify or overlook the geographical dimensions of resource-related conflicts. By defining spatiality primarily in terms of the location of resource reserves and flows generating revenues for belligerents, these approaches overlook other geographical aspects of resources crucial to conflicts. Focusing on "conflict diamonds" and drawing on recent international relations works and geographical research on the political ecology of violence, commodity chains, and consumption, the article presents an alternative conceptual framework engaging with resource-related spaces of vulnerability, risk, and opportunity for conflicts. This framework, in turn, highlights policy biases resulting from oversimplified readings of "resource war" geographies.

Oil, Natural Gas, and Intrastate Conflict: Does Ownership Matter?

“…In recent years, the resource-conflict link has increasingly been questioned (see Brunnschweiler and Bulte 2009;Thies 2010). Authors stress the 2 For an overview of the possible mechanisms driving the relationship between natural resources and civil war onset, see Humphreys (2005), Ross (2004Ross ( , 2006, and Le Billon (2008).…”

“…Contextual conditions identified in the literature include the characteristics of the available resource (Ross 2003;Snyder and Bhavnani 2005) or the point in time in which revenues arrive (Humphreys 2005). Le Billon (2001Billon ( , 2008 stresses the lootability of resources, noting that the exploitation of "diffuse" and "distant" resources like alluvial diamonds, alluvial gold, or drugs cannot be controlled by central governments-thus they are more lootable for rebels (see also Lujala 2010).…”

Revisiting the Resource-Conflict Link: A Systematic Comparative Test of Causal Mechanisms in Four Major Oil-Exporting Countries

“…3 With regard to causal mechanisms, several different lists of such mechanisms have been developed (for example, Ross 2004;Humphreys 2005;Le Billon 2008). These lists differ somewhat, but they generally state that natural resources promote violence through three major mechanisms and several submechanisms: (a) motive, (b) opportunity, and (c) indirect mechanisms such as detrimental impacts on institutions and socioeconomic development.…”

“…The first main causal mechanism connects resources and violent conflict through motive, which Le Billon considers a "risk" for "resource wars" (Le Billon 2008). Resources may be the source of conflict between several actors; violence may result from conflict over how the benefits and the costs of resource production are shared between different groups within a country.…”

Why do Some Oil Exporters Experience Civil War but Others do Not? A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Net Oil-Exporting Countries

“…These ideas have been further developed in the literature. Generally, natural resources can promote violence through three major causal mechanisms (Humphreys 2005;Ross 2004b; also Le Billon 2008): 1) Motivation to take up arms may result from resource-related grievances, such as ecological damage or the withholding of resource revenues; costs and benefits relating to resources are the driving forces of conflict.…”