Blood?

Metaphorically speaking, that is. This refers to the global efforts to check the sale and use of conflict minerals.

Oh, like blood diamonds?

Yes. Blood minerals are so called because they help fund violent conflicts. For instance, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo these minerals come from mines controlled by militant groups notorious for human rights violations. Rights groups and the United Nations have released several reports exposing the pathetic working conditions and abuses prevailing in these mines. The Kivu region in eastern Congo houses many illegal mines. The country has several armed groups fighting with each other, claiming millions of lives and forcing several millions to flee their homeland.

At the last count, over 5 million people had been affected by civil war since the late 1990s.

What are these minerals?

Tin, tungsten, tantalum and gold or their derivatives — popularly known as the 3TG metals. Tantalum is widely used to make capacitors and high-power resistors. The other two metals are used in automobiles, sports goods and consumer goods industries. It is estimated that more than 60 per cent of these metals used globally are smuggled. Most of the popular gadget makers and consumer goods manufacturers reportedly buy such raw material.

But not many companies will admit this.

Blood minerals are the new dirty secret of the gadget industry. That’s the sense one gets seeing the response of technology companies to a directive from the US Securities and Exchange Commission on declaring whether their products contains conflict minerals. The watchdog had asked more than 1200 firms (tech, manufacturing) which are listed in the US to respond by June 2.

And how many of them came forward?

To be fair, most of them filed their reports at the eleventh hour; but they were suitably vague. But it is a fact that most of them are using these materials to build their snazzy machines. Companies say they can’t say for sure whether the stuff they buy from agents are sourced from militias in Africa. It is learnt that these minerals reach factories through circuitous routes, which most companies don’t want to talk about.

Obviously nobody’s going to say 'we are funding a war’…

True. Even the SEC knows it’s a tough ask. That’s why it had asked companies to audit their entire supply chain. But activists say the directives are not strong enough and companies don’t give them much attention. According to Global Witness, an organisation tracking conflict minerals, which has reviewed most of the reports the US companies have submitted, it doesn’t seem as though companies have taken necessary steps to find out what is really going on along their supply chains. Responses from some popular manufacturers were interestingly fuzzy; while Cisco said it was “unable to determine” the exact source of its conflict materials, IBM revealed it was using conflict minerals, but not as a direct buyer. Some companies charged the SEC with intruding on their privacy and free speech!

Are there any alternatives?

Yes, there are some. The Conflict-Free Smelter Program of Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative, a gathering of companies which was founded in 2008, is one. This is backed by the likes of Intel, Apple and Dell. Then there is OECD’s conflict minerals programme. And there are companies such as the Amsterdam-based Fairphone, which produces phones only using conflict-free minerals. But the campaigners say the real effort should come from the consumers. They should take their companies to task on conflict minerals by demanding they disclose if their pet product bears a bloodstain or not.

A weekly column that helps you ask the right questions

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW