Corporations Response to the conflicts

Introduction

In many ways, it can be said that the Corporations Response to the conflicts in Africa has been much significant. This is not necessarily, however, a positive statement. The exploitation of extractable natural resources on the African continent has made the continuation of many African conflicts possible. Weapons are sometimes exchanged directly for resources such as diamonds, and often the very existence of rebel groups and warlords depends on their ability to control these resources. Mining companies helped finance Joseph Kabila’s push to topple Mobutu in Zaire in exchange for mining contracts when his rebel forces were still 1,000 kilometres from Kinshasa.

The chain of exploitation of natural resources from extraction to the point of final sale is often long and complicated, and the major Western firm selling the product that is the reason for the initial extraction of the resource may or may not know that that resource is contributing to the perpetuation of conflict in Africa (see Pugh, Cooper and Goodhand, 2004: 28-29).

Cases of Corporations Response to the conflicts

It must be said, however, that the exploitation of such resources is highly profitable, and it would go against the business interests of these corporations to cease their involvement in such business, or to use their leverage to reduce the violence related to resource exploitation. One possible exception is the commitment shown by major diamond corporations not to buy ‘blood diamonds’ (mined from conflict zones), and their cooperation with the Kimberly process, which aims to ensure that the origin of all diamonds can be certified.

Western-based private security firms (a more politically acceptable term for what are essentially mercenaries) are also seen as having a role in conflicts in Africa. Such firms appeared to be instrumental in rescuing a government in began projects in the DRC, after having been attracted by the response to the volcanic eruptions in Goma. One Japanese NGO, with a minimal presence in Africa, sent emergency response teams to New Orleans in the USA to assist in the aftermath of hurricane damage there.

There are, however, a number of exceptions to this trend. Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) devoted the vast majority of its budget to crises in Africa, the top three recipients being Sudan, DRC and Angola in 2004. Less than one week after the Indian Ocean Tsunami, MSF estimated that they had received sufficient donations to cover their activities, and appealed to donors to instead donate for other pressing emergencies in Sudan, the DRC and Somalia. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) not only maintains humanitarian aid projects in the DRC, but has also contributed greatly to awareness on the conflict by conducting a series of mortality surveys, revealing the globally unequalled levels of humanitarian suffering in that country.