Feature: The Price Of Technology

Melanie Scagliarini's latest report looks at the 'Three Ts' being snatched from the heart of Africa - Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten - minerals found in our very own laptops and mobile phones...

You’re probably reading this on your laptop, mobile phone, or even iPad. Perhaps you just signed an online petition for a deserving cause... But what would you say if I told you that the device you’re reading this from may be funding the deadliest conflict since WWII in the Democratic Republic of Congo?

Most of us have heard of the blood diamond, but now it’s time to meet its ugly sisters: the conflict minerals. Not as pretty, but just as deadly, these conflict substances, Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten (nicknamed the ‘Three Ts’) form an integral part of most electronic equipment which can be fouund in vast quantities in eastern Congo, due to their cheap prices.

“Eastern Congo is the rape capital of the world because of the militias and armed groups that survive principally because of the sale of minerals”

Speaking to Ctrl.Alt.Shift, Sasha Lezhnev of the Enough Project [1]explained, “Eastern Congo is the rape capital of the world because of the militias and armed groups that survive principally because of the sale of minerals.” The DRC produces one fifth of the world’s Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten, and 80% of Coltan comes from the country. Congo’s production of conflict minerals is therefore a matter of ethical concern for all users of technology...

With (an estimated) monthly death toll of 45,000 [2] (from hunger and disease caused by the conflict, there has been a growing movement to regulate the source of these minerals to prevent profits being used for ill.

Spearheaded by Enough – the NGO co-founded by renowned Africa expert and activist John Prendergast – as well as various human rights groups, the cause has been championed by various grassroots movements and publicised by a range of celebrities. The US is also leading the way by passing the Conflict Minerals Trade Act in 2010 [3].

Taking inspiration from the Kimberly Accord - the pledge to trace and certify the diamond trade, which a heart-warming 52 countries ratified - the Conflict Mineral Act’s aim is to ensure that ores used are not from mines within the Congo’s conflict zones. Since Barack Obama signed along the dotted line just four months ago [4], Canada has also begun debating similar legislation -  and similar legislation is currently being considered by MPs in Europe.

Unsurprisingly, this law has been criticised by electronics companies in the US who claim that the source is impossible to trace, with many lobbying for a watered down version. However, according to Enough, it is surprisingly simple to tell where a hoard of minerals comes from [5] just by looking at it (see base of page 3).

Last year, Global Witness, conducted a poll of 200 electronics companies [6] and found that most had no contract to stop these minerals entering their supply chain. Today I took my own ‘glance at the stance’ of a couple of the major electronics producers. Apple boss, Steve Jobs, has already publicly confessed that conflict materials are “a problem” and, on its website, Nokia claims that it requires “written assurance from our suppliers... that these materials do not originate from the conflict areas in DRC.” Ditto for Hewlett Packard. However, as HP also admits on its website, these supplier statements do not provide full assurance [7] that the mineral did not come from the Congo.

In a recent report, The Case for Conflict Minerals Certification and Army Reform, John Prendergast wrote, “The message has been sent that the status quo on conflict minerals is unacceptable and the profits purchased with so much Congolese blood are at risk. If we miss the window for change now, these incidents will only get worse. But if we seize this moment and help shake up the system, conflict minerals and the war will become things of the past.

With just two countries passing a law on conflict materials so far, perhaps the socially conscious of us don’t need to do a sponsored bungee jump, nor trek to a far-flung corner of the world and pledge our allegiance to the poor in order to ‘do our bit’; we may be able to help by simply insisting on buying conflict-free goods. As shiny, fun and useful as it may be, can a gadget be considered ‘cool’ if it may be helping perpetuate one of the most brutal conflicts on the planet?

Words: Melanie Scagliarini
Photo: Flickr user ENOUGH project [8], of conflict minerals - tin, tantalum and tungsten.