Blood diamonds are a girl’s best friend
3:00 pm - August 9th 2010
Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
When you are one of the world’s most beautiful women, it must be infuriatingly easy to lose track of exactly which guys are giving you diamonds at any given moment.
And while I have not personally dated a supermodel for any length of time, friends that have tell me that only the merest handful of them boast the postgraduate background in international relations necessary for a self-assured grasp of the politics of west Africa.
But it would take a particularly dozy gold-digger to fail to recognise hugely valuable uncut gems when a couple of government heavies wake you up in the middle of the night and present them to you in a pouch.
So Naomi Campbell’s sworn statement that she had no idea of either the provenance or the real nature of a bag of dirty stones bought to her hotel room in Pretoria one night 13 years ago do her little credit.
Coming over all wide-eyed and innocent before the UN war crimes court in The Hague last week, Ms Campbell insisted: ‘I had never heard of Charles Taylor before. I had never heard of the country Liberia before. I had never heard the term blood diamonds before.’
Alright, love. Grab a map of Africa. See that kinda sticky-out bit on the top left? If you look carefully enough at the countries along the bottom, you will notice the adjoining nations of Sierra Leone and Liberia.
That Taylor bloke is a brutal warlord who eventually won out after a particularly nasty civil war that may have cost around 250,000 lives, and thus became president of Liberia in 1997. The job is like being the head of a really, really important model booking agency. Except it’s even more important than that.
Taylor also controlled Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front, which he bankrolled in return for massive kickbacks from the rebels’ diamond racket. The money raised in this way was spent on the acquisition of huge amounts of arms from eastern Europe and the Middle East, purchased through a range of shady middlemen.
The report of the United Nations panel of experts on Sierra Leone, published in December 2000, was quite plain on how all this worked. ‘President Charles Taylor,’ it charged,’ is actively involved in fuelling the violence in Sierra Leone.’
It went on to conclude that there is ‘unequivocal and overwhelming evidence that Liberia has been actively supporting the RUF at all levels, in providing training, weapons and related materiel, logistical support, a staging ground for attacks and a safe haven for retreat and recuperation, and for public relations activities’.
Taylor’s time in office was characterised by war crimes and crimes against humanity. After only two years, a second civil war broke out. This time Taylor lost, and resigned in 2003, and fled to Nigeria. Three years after that, he was extradited to Monrovia, and from there transferred to UN custody.
That’s how come he is now on trial, and that’s how come Ms Campbell found herself subpoenaed to give evidence.
Having been a full-time habitué of the catwalk since her mid-teens, Naomi might well not be a subscriber to Foreign Affairs or The Economist, and no doubt her schedule is far too busy for her to find time even to ski- read the international news pages of a quality broadsheet with any great regularity.
But even so, that bag of dirty pebbles might just have been expected to pique her curiousity, if sadly not her conscience.
Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
Dave Osler is a regular contributor. He is a British journalist and author, ex-punk and ex-Trot. Also at: Dave's Part
· Other posts by Dave Osler
Story Filed Under: Blog ,Foreign affairs
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
I dunno, Dave. Each time a bloke crawls up on all fours to hand me another bucket of rubies, I just throw them on the pile.
I saw a judge ask Mia Farrow had she seen the film Blood Diamond and was it possible she was remembering a conversation from that film and not an actual one she’d had with Naomi Campbell.
It was the most surreal thing I’d seen since Inception.
“And while I have not personally dated a supermodel for any length of time”
Stroppy is going to pissed off at that
Still, the saga does illustrate an important lesson for warlords and presidents everywhere – you can kill as many people as you like, providing you don’t associate with celebrities. Once you do, the world’s media will become interested.
“I dunno, Dave. Each time a bloke crawls up on all fours to hand me another bucket of rubies, I just throw them on the pile.”
I’ve spent quite a bit on those rubies Kate
@Carl – I smelt a rat in yr bucket, son. Yr rubies were all exactly the same size and they still had the price tags on them.
Naomi can be easily confused it seems – one minute she was campaigning on behalf of PETA, snarling “I’d rather go naked than wear fur” – next she is draped in Russian sable to promote Dennis Basso’s exciting autumn/winter collection;
http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/daily/090706-naomi-campbell-fronts-fur-campaign.aspx
Mind you I think very few super-models enjoy such lofty status because of their record on political issues or their ability to identify with those who seldom join the glitterati at exclusive fashion events in New York, Milan or Paris?
While it’s all very easy to have chuckle and a dig at Ms Campbell’s naivity, with this case I’m left wondering why the hell did Mandela invite the criminal Taylor in the first place?
leave it out Kate, the guy who sold them to me, Terry his name was, he sells DVDs at the weekend, he’s under stress for gods sake
@5 @8
Get a room!
I just heard a bit more on Radio 4 PM. Apparently the charming Ms Campbell was disappointed when the stones weren’t all shiny and nice. It certainly rang true compared to her testimony last week.
I guess Taylor was too busy butchering his opponents to fully understand the finer points of wooing a super-model, and anti-fur campaigner like our Naomi?
Unpolished diamonds, even Terry, the antreprenurial ruby and DVD salesman could do better than that?
@9
I’d be delighted to get a room with young Mr Raincoat, except that I suspect any date we have will be fish and chips on the bus and a quick shag on the stairs. You should have seen his rubies, man. They floated in the bath.
Fish & chips?!
Very want. Where do I sign up?
I want fish N chips
p.s. sorry Dave
@7 Quite
Nor was Mr Mandela alone, you may recall Sarah Brown raising a few eyebrows when she nominated Naomi Campbell first as “global ambassador” for the White Ribbon Alliance and then as a “heroine of the 21st century”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/dec/06/sarah-brown-naomi-campbell-harpers
It is just depressing that charities seem to be so utterly beholden to the power of celebrities that they are compelled to overlook the fact that their “spokesmen” are often ignorant of and indifferent about the causes they purport to espouse.
Naomi Campbell claimed it was a “massive inconvenience” for her to be giving evidence at a war crimes trial when, presumably, she could have been doing something far more important with her time such as…modelling.
She has a fairly decent history of sucking up to tyrants:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/59225.stm
@15 exactly, would really recommend marina hyde’s book to see how much damage celebs are capable of wreaking in the name of charidee. angelina jolie in namibia anyone?
So what gave you the impression that Naomi is lying and that same instinct says to you Mia is saying the truth…You have got no moral right to judge a situation you were not privileged to be a part off. Remember Mia lied about her divorce with Moody before now…
My friend Naomi has committed no war crime…the West just want to nail Charles Taylor to the diamond so as to convict him..for goodness sake Naomi never benefited from the Diamond and she has recanted what she could remember and stop your nonsense
[18] it’s perfectly understandable that you are protective toward a friend – but don’t be too hard on LC commentators, it seems very few regard Naomi’s version of events as likely to be truthful (a mere 3% according to YouGov)
http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/YG-Archives-Pol-Sun-NaomiCampbell-110810.pdf
For some reason the public suspect that she has not been entirely honest? – in fact 79% of those questioned think Naomi Campbell should be recalled to court “to re-examine her testimony”.
Personally I don’t care if Naomi is lying or not, and I certainly don’t think she should be recalled to give further evidence.
The world’s contempt should be reserved for Taylor, and Taylor alone – a man who is undoubtedly guilty of unspeakable acts of cruelty to his fellow countrymen and political opponents.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
-
Liberal Conspiracy
Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend http://bit.ly/ab6OZM
-
Steve Wood
RT @libcon: Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend http://bit.ly/ab6OZM
-
Chitra Nagarajan
RT @libcon: Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend http://bit.ly/ab6OZM
-
Chandani Thapa
RT @libcon: Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend http://bit.ly/ab6OZM
-
Tammy Cooper
Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend | Liberal Conspiracy: Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend. by Dave Osl… http://bit.ly/cXwHGQ
-
Rick
RT @libcon: Blood diamonds are a girl's best friend http://bit.ly/ab6OZM
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
35 Comments
6 Comments
20 Comments
45 Comments
39 Comments
26 Comments
24 Comments
58 Comments
72 Comments
20 Comments
13 Comments
16 Comments
47 Comments
114 Comments
38 Comments
17 Comments
43 Comments
121 Comments
26 Comments
NEWS ARTICLES ARCHIVE