TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 2
3.0 Issues ............................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Children as a rebel force: ............................................................................................ 5
3.2 Conflict Diamond (Blood Diamond) .......................................................................... 7
3.3 Family Love .............................................................................................................. 10
4.0 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 12
1.0 Introduction

We selected to complete option one and watch the movie, Blood Diamond, a film
directed by Edward Zwick in 2006 that depicts the world of diamond market and conflict of
Sierra Leone in the 1992 - 2002. The movie deals with many ethical issues. The movie portrays
two characters in particular; one is Solomon Vandy, a father who want to save his family,
played by Djimon Hounsou and Danny Archer, an Anglo ex-mercenary from Rhodesia and a
diamond smuggler, played by Leonardo DiCaprio. The main focus of this movie is conflict
diamond in Sierra Leonne and the demand supply for diamond in the develop country.

2.0 Summary

The film starts when Solomon Vandy, a Mende fisherman, is captured by the
Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels when they invade the small Sierra Leonian village
of Shenge. Separated from his family, Solomon is enslaved to work in the diamond fields under
the command of Captain Poison while his son Dia is conscripted into the rebel forces, the
brainwashing eventually turning him into a hardened killer. The RUF use the diamonds to fund
their war effort, often trading them directly for arms. While working in the RUF diamond fields
as a forced labourer, Solomon finds a large diamond of rare pink colouring. Moments before
government troops launch an attack, Captain Poison sees Solomon hiding the diamond. Captain
Poison is injured in the attack before he can get the stone, and both he and Solomon are taken
to prison in Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone.

Danny Archer is an Anglo ex-mercenary from Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), trades arms
for diamonds with an RUF commander. He is imprisoned after being caught smuggling the
diamonds into neighbouring Liberia, and the diamonds are confiscated. He had been
transporting the diamonds to a South African mercenary named Colonel Coetzee, who is in
turn employed by South African diamond company executive Van De Kaap and his deputy
Simmons. Coetzee is Archer's former commander in 32 Battalion. Archer is desperate for a
way to repay Colonel Coetzee for the diamonds taken from him when he was arrested and
thrown in jail, in the same prison as Solomon. While in prison, he overhears Captain Poison
ranting to Solomon about the discovery of the large diamond and decides to hunt down the
stone. He arranges for Solomon's release from prison and offers to help him find his family in
exchange for the diamond.
 Archer and Solomon meet Maddy Bowen, an American journalist, and ask for helps to
track down Solomons family. Bowen soon learns that Archer is using Solomon to find his
diamond and will eventually steal it for himself, to leave Africa forever. Bowen, a
humanitarian, refuses to help Archer unless he can tell her about the diamond market to stop
the flow of blood diamonds out of Africa, cutting off funding for Civil War and ending a mass
revolution. Archer gives Bowen the information that she wants and gets access to use the press
convoy to travel to Kono to find the diamond.

The convoy is attacked and Archer, Solomon and Bowen escape and find their way to
the South African mercenary force under Colonel Coetzee. The two men leave the camp on
foot while Bowen boards a plane carrying foreigners out of the conflict zone. After an arduous
overnight trek, the men reach the mining camp in a river valley, still under RUF control, where
Solomon discovered and buried the large diamond. Here, Solomon is painfully reunited with
his son Dia, who refuses to acknowledge him because he has been brainwashed by the rebels.
Solomon is also reunited with Captain Poison, who orders him to find the diamond, but the
South African mercenary force, also after the diamond, dispatches the RUF rebels in a massive
air strike which kills many of the RUF rebels and some of the miners. Amist the choas,
Solomon suffers from temporary insanity and kills Poison with a shovel. Through a deal with
Archer, Colonel Coetzee forces Solomon to retrieve the stone. In a desperate battle, Archer
kills Colonel Coetzee and the other two soldiers with him after realizing that they would have
killed both Archer and Solomon upon locating the diamond. At this point Dia holds Archer and
Solomon at gunpoint with a pistol, but Solomon manages to convince him to side with them.

As Archer overturns a body to take equipment he realizes he has been shot, but keeps
this to himself. Having arranged in advance for a plane to pick him up, he radios to the pilot,
Benjamin Kapanay, who demands that Archer dump Solomon and Dia. Slowly and painfully
the group makes its way from the valley towards an airstrip atop a nearby ridge. Archer
collapses, unable to climb, and Solomon carries him a little ways before Archer has him put
him down. He tells Solomon to take Dia home, knowing that he is dying, and gives them the
diamond. Archer holds off the soldiers chasing them while Solomon and Dia flee, and then
makes a final phone call to Bowen, asking her to help Solomon as a last favour before looking
out over the beautiful landscape of Africa once more and dying peacefully.

With the help of Bowen, Solomon trades the diamond to Simmons for a large sum of
money and the reunification of his family, making the exchange as Solomon's wife and children
deplane from a Lear Jet at a London airport. Bowen, who secretly photographs the deal, later
publishes a magazine piece exposing the trade in "conflict" or "blood" diamonds. The film ends
with Solomon smiling at the photograph Maddy took of Archer earlier, now published in her
magazine along with the complete story of their journey, before addressing a conference on
blood diamonds in Kimberley, South Africa, describing his experiences. This refers to an actual
meeting that took place in Kimberley in 2000 and led to the Kimberley Process Certification
Scheme, which seeks to certify the origin of diamonds in order to curb the trade in conflict
diamonds.
3.0 Issues

3.1 Children as a rebel force:

The situation described in the movie is about the Revolutionary United Front (RUF),
which is a rebel group fighting the government in Sierra Leone 1999. To put the situation in a
soldiers mind that they were invaded by the west and the diamond in their country was stolen
by greed people, the government in the country was corrupted, and they asked themselves if
there is a way to win in this fight. This perspective is based on RUF as one minded soldiers, of
course they are not, but in order to make this argument the assumption is so.

The RUF kidnaped children from the small villages in Sierra Leone and turn them into
hard hearted soldier, who take a gun and shoot citizen without sympathy. The children
brainwashed by the RUF, says that without a gun they do not have a power and people will not
afraid to them as they still a child. The RUF also says to the children that they will become a
man when they joined the rebel force and they can get what they want such as food, alcohol
drink, gun, and as well a drug.

In this movie plot, there is no solution to overcome the child soldier as they conquered
the main place and the main road that connected town of the Sierra Leone. Archer himself
shoot a gun to the children at the bridge, when he and others want to cross the road to go to the
other town in the mission to track Solomons family.

The first ethical theory that can be linked to the response of child soldiers is egoism.
The main concept of this theory is justified with one having to focus on one self; to control all
other things is to hard (Crane and Matten 2010). It is important to distinguish from selfishness,
and one can argue that this action can be justified as an egoistic mind set, not a selfish point of
view.

They do not fight only for their own winning; they fight for what they believe is best
for the country and RUF. Even though the rest of the world disagree to the use of kids as a
rebel force, but how can they judge a situation that for most of them is so far away that they
can only be prejudice not knowledgeable about the situation? One can even go so far to say
that both the consequentialist theories supports the actions performed by this rebel group, they
are fighting for their own desires and what they believe is the greater good. In order to do so
they have to utilise the resources available, as the result to the action that they take, they using
children as soldiers and living in utilitarianism. Consequentialist theories focus on the outcome,
and one can state that is what has to be the focus in order to actually use so young people for
means in war.

The differences between the theories are that egoism focuses on the decision-maker
while utilitarianism casts an eye on the wider community, which RUF seems to do as well
when fighting against the government (Crane and Matten 2010). For the remaining theories on
this issue, there is no one that can be associated with the use of children for these actions. Both
non-consequentialist theories have clear moral guidance that will not support the course of
actions taken by the RUF.

Ethical duties have three main maxims, and we believe that there is no one in RUF
soldier would want the use of child soldiers to become a universal law. Maxim two analyses
will tells us that all the children do not have a choice and they are force to become soldiers,
and can be said to be used as means by the RUF to achieve their goals, not to educate the
children in the right way.

The third maxim is the actions are universally not accepted by the world. Ethics of
rights and justice has a large focus on human dignity and humanity; one can reasonably state
that there is neither in the use of children as soldiers. So we can now make a short summary to
say that with a pluralistic (maybe a bit more relativistic) view on the two consequentialist
ethical theories the use of kids to bear arms can be justified.

As a recommendation to resolve this issue, by stopping blood diamonds will help stop
child slavery, by cutting off illegal diamond trade & preventing the finance from the diamonds
to continue the war. It will also help prevent any more war involving the rebels. The first step
to helping this serious issue is to educate people on it and to spread the word. The government
and NGO need to cooperate with each other to create awareness about the impact of child
soldier, to the children itself and to the growth of the country. The second step to helping this
issue is to donate money to World Food Program (WFP). Because of the war, people have been
raided of their villages, & are living in camps, or homeless. WFP funds that by delivering food
to save the lives of victims of war, & civil conflict.

Child soldiers are practically robbed of their childhood, and chances to have an
education, or stable environment. The children are also exposed to terrible dangers, with mental
and physical suffering due to the fact they are forced to fight, as well as the fact that they are
recruited into armed forces. Stopping blood diamonds will stop the civil war in Africa, helps
children get a chance to grow up in a stable environment, with education and their family.
3.2 Conflict Diamond (Blood Diamond)

The title of the movie itself illustrates the first ethical issue; blood diamond or in other
words, conflict diamonds which are rough and uncut stones used by rebel and terrorists to
finance their act of terrorism and war. The movie is based on this scenario where diamonds are
smuggled from Africa and illegally sold to high-end businessmen of other countries in order to
fund the war in Africa. This act leads to so many unethical and illegal behaviours.

Bling-Bang - Conflict diamonds or blood diamonds as the title of the movie confirms
is an important ethical issue enlightened by director Edward Zwick. Before going into
discussion around ethics regarding this topic, a short definition of conflict diamonds is
appropriate: Conflict Diamonds also known as blood diamonds are diamonds that are used
to fuel conflict and human rights abuses. They have founded brutal conflicts that have
resulted in the death and displacement of millions of people. (Global Witness 2011). In Sierra
Leone 1999 the diamonds are traded for mostly weapons by the RUF, the buyers are big
diamond companies using cleansing methods around the world in order to wash the stones.
As the movie shows us, the diamond industry is powerful and unethical.

The first proposed solution to be addressed will be blood diamonds. Already the
Kimberly process has been formed in 2003. This is a response on conflict diamonds and
mentioned in the beginning of the movie (Global Witness 2010). The imitative is a non-
government, non-corporate and therefore independent imitative which certify conflict
diamonds. It is said to be an exclusive club as only members can trade with members and
therefore something countries long to take a part in.

Global Witness state on their homepage attempts at industry self-regulation have

been woefully insufficient; meaning that it still isnt possible to guarantee to consumers that
the diamonds they purchase are free from the taint of conflict and human rights abuse. And
this tells us that it is hard, but at least someone is putting in an effort. So when the regulation
is hard, we should take care of some roots of the problem. Diamonds is a good defined as a
want, it is not a need. One can therefore blame the consumers on making it possible for
companies to profit so much of diamond trade, and by doing so I want to put some of this
responsibility back in their hands. The consumer has to make sure that what they are buying
does not support conflicts in other nations. If a system would be demanded by the people, one
could argue that the power which lies with the people is strong enough to make the corporations
act.
 Working from a view of pluralism which is an ethical middle way between absolutism
and relativism, one which I believe should and is being used the most, the actions of the
diamonds corporations are highly immoral and unethical. Pluralism is based on the notion that
morality is a social phenomenon according to Kaler (Crane and Matten 2010). If one would
argue that morality is a social phenomenon, the morality of taking use of rebel groups as RUF
and their extreme methods of operations can in no way be justified.

Aiding criminal and horrifying actions like these should never be done. The scary part
is that this is nothing new, corporations do think of people as means only which is opposite of
what the second maxim of ethical duties suggest (Crane and Matten 2010). A quote from the
movie which describes this situation, and implies that the companies fool consumers into
believing that every diamond comes without blood is said by Danny Archer when talking to an
American journalist, In America its bling bling, but out here its bling bang. (Imdb.com
2011), What Mr Archer here says is very on the spot on how unethical the operations of
diamond companies deceive the world. And they do so knowingly, after all the intro of the
movie shows a G8 conference where diamond CEOs are precent and applauded for attending
the fight against blood diamonds.

When they at the end then still buy blood diamonds, their actions can be nothing else
than both immoral and unethical. For every ethical theory that include morality, honour, or
even the greater good, these people do not seem to care, and it is hard to find any way to justify
their means except for financial winnings, which is sad, unethical and immoral. Their actions
can be found as unethical by three of the four ethical theories mentioned; the only one that
again can come to create peace of mind for the CEOs is the line of egoism. Again the financial
desires of diamond companies seems to be all they care about, and if they believe that
everything else is not their problem, then egoism will accept the actions of these people. And
as the last paragraph stated, they knowingly deceive and knowingly know what the history of
their stones are.

They make that history matter to them as soon as they attend the diamond meeting. And
when they make that blood covering those diamonds matter, stepping out of line of the egoistic
theory is something they do, and as ethical theories are rules and principals that determines
right and wrong, these actions can clearly be stated as wrong (Crane and Matten 2010). I will
not spend much time on covering the three remaining theories on this topic because I do not
see room for much distortion when measuring the decisions up to the remaining three theories.
Put simply, utilitarianism is not supported because their actions are not for the greater good.

There is no greater good in buying conflict diamonds unknowingly for consumers;

neither is there for exploiting a brutal civil war for economical purposes. There are to
significant impacts on worlds society for this to be disregarded. Over to the non-
consequentialist theories they are as described previously in the essay based much on morality,
dignity and humanity, and there are room for little of these concepts in the actions of Van de
Kaap. Van de Kaap is the character of the diamond CEO in this movie. And as mentioned
earlier supporting such horrible military actions defies what the second maxim of ethical duties
suggests.

The point will pursue reasoning for which diamonds create unethical behaviour. To find
the meaning of exploiting Sierra Leone for their diamonds we can draw similarities with the
reasoning above. More accurately the strategy used to rationalise unethical behaviour. Van de
Kaap will be again the person of interest in this, and in this movie this person represents the
strategy denial of responsibility (Anand, Ashforth and Joshi 2004).

Not in the same way as the children described above, but in the sense that they believe
that if they do not take advantage of these diamonds, someone else will. By having that attitude
the other strategy, denial of injury (Anand, Ashforth and Joshi 2004) also fits. They may
acknowledge that people are getting harmed, but it is not their responsibility since someone
else would take their place if they were not there.

The reward is what gives the organisation meaning, people tend to do what they are
rewarded for, and in that process it is easy to forget the ethics regarding their actions (Crane
and Matten 2010). We can also blame the worlds ignorance of the issue, Crane and Matten
(2010) writes that Quite simply, ethical violations that go unpunished are likely to be
repeated. And this is the worlds responsibility, in the movie we find a journalist to take this
job, fighting against a world that seems oblivious to the issue.

As the recommendation, the Kimberley Process certification scheme for rough

diamonds must make provision for regular, independent monitoring of all national diamond
control systems. Without this, it will create false consumer confidence and the appearance of
integrity where none can be assured. Such false confidence will do nothing to stop conflict
diamonds where they still exist, and it will do nothing to prevent their return where controls
are weak and predators are strong.
 Next, governments should actively support the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative. Its aim is to increase transparency over payments by companies to governments and
government-linked entities, as well as transparency over revenues by those host country
governments. Revenues from oil, gas and mining companies, in the form of taxes, royalties,
signature bonuses and other payments should be an important engine for economic growth and
social development in developing and transition countries. However, the lack of accountability
and transparency in these revenues can exacerbate poor governance and lead to corruption,
conflict and poverty.

3.3 Family Love

When Solomon worked in the mines, he found the pink diamond he hid under his feet.
He said he needed to go to the bathroom, Captain Poison tried to find if he hid the diamond in
his mouth and told him in a hurry, but when he would hide the dizzy Captain Poison went with
him and saw the diamond and cast Solomon to give him a diamond. They were soon attacked
by soldiers who imprisoned him, when Poison attacked him, he said he did not know what
diamond he was talking about, Poison pounded him to find his family, Solomon did not know
anyone else knew about the diamond he was finding.

When Asher tells him to hear about the diamond, Solomon who is currently working in
a hotel has a doorman who completely ignores it and refuses to tell him where the diamond
was buried, but when he sees the city being attacked, Asher tells him he knows where his family
does not believe in Solomon to him. So with the help of Maddie and Asher, Solomon arrives
at the runaway camp and sees his wife and daughter whom she calls for, but she learns that her
kid is kidnapped by the RUF and the shameful Solomon who was attacked by the officer. He
told Asher what he wanted to be buried somewhere, so they were looking for a diamond, but
Solomon was more detained to meet the kidnapped son then Asher the diamond wanted, they
both fought after Asher insulted him with racial words, and told him to be are there protecting
his son if he is captured so they look for him first.

So when he was going to look for some woods, he restructured his son He with his
voice, but He did not restructure him, when he tried to convince him to go with him. He made
him arrest again. When he was caught and put in another mine, he refused to find the same
diamonds if Poison threatened to kill his family, but when he would eventually take a spade to
find their diamonds attacked by the army. In the chaos of Solomon finally killed Captain
Poison, but now captured by soldiers, he refused to tell where he hid the diamond so Asher
took his son and Solomon had no option to show where the diamond was hidden. When he said
that the diamond had no hope of a soldier would let them go, but it failed because soldiers shot
to kill them if they did not have a diamond, so Asher and Solomon cheated the troops before
Asher eventually killed them, when he found his son's diamonds holding a gun on them. He
finally made his son back to normal, Asher gave him a diamond and told him to go with him
to Conakry to the refugee camp.

When he went to London, he wanted to get caught up with Vanderkamp with Maddie's
help, he told vanderkamp he wanted his family after he went to give him a diamond and also
wanted the money, and then when he was at the hotel he received a phone call. So he went on
a taxi to meet Vanderkamp and saw his family out of the plane, eventually reuniting with his
family once again, and the end of the movie that now lives with his family in London and
reading Maddie Magazine and making a speech.

Solomon exhibited many positive traits such as a father who was determined to save
his son and incriminate his family. He shows courage by pursuing family members regardless
of personal needs. He voluntarily fights physically, lays [describes himself as a cameraman],
and steals [burying a huge pink diamond he finds to reunite the family. But even though he
must operate in areas where he usually does not, he is still puts high marks on honesty when
he criticizes Archer for lying: "You will say nothing. Solomon is still a man of integrity. His
personality radiates when Solomon's convoy ignores a newly bombed car. Improves personal
safety because he sees deep tears mother's eye, she raced to the woman to take her injured son
from her hand to flee her safety van convoy. Even wars and cruelty did not rob Solomon.

One way of describing 'relationship' is that it is the space between you and an 'other'. It
is the physical space, and it is more. It is the emotional space, the energetic space, the spiritual
space between self and other. The philosopher, Martin Buber, talked about that space between
two human beings as a sacred space. It is a space where true encounter and deep intimacy can
be experienced, especially in love relationships. But even in non-romantic relationships, it is a
space of mutual responsibility, giving and receiving. So whether two people are in a romantic
relationship, family, friends, or have a professional relationship such as doctor/patient,
insurance company/doctor, citizen/legislator, that space is still between them.
Everything we put into our relationship space either supports, develops, builds, strengthens it,
or it weakens and pollutes it with tension and distress. If we don't pay attention to the space
between us, it is very easy for small, and big, distresses to build up in our relationship climate,
polluting the space and leading to growing disconnection, which itself creates more distress. It
is not so much that someone intends to pollute the space, but more that it either they don't think
about the impact on the other and the relationship itself, or they contribute to the distress in
trying to protect themselves or get their needs met in a way that disregards or is at the expense
of the needs of the other.

In short, we cannot decide rashly and too much in anger. Because its will affect their safety.
Solomon should listen to Mr. Archer because he know to deal with the others. His goal is to
provide cheap diamonds found by stakeholders, like Solomon, that wish to use the blood diamond
to free his family and to stop the exploitation of his peoples. Danny Archers means to an end is
to be able to find these diamonds to make the Colonel massive profits off of them.

4.0 Conclusion

The final section of this essay will be a short movie review combined with some conclusions
from this essay. The director Edward Zwick has in my eyes done a fantastic job, the movie is
stuffed with real life issues, and two are presented in this text by child soldiers and blood
diamonds. Zwick presents ethical issues in an action packed thriller filled with good acting and
effects. I view this movie as a perfect combination of Hollywood and the real world, there are
a few clichs, but that has to be expected; the rest is a mind opening truth that certainly was a
goal for the production when the release date was set 18th of December, right before the years
biggest diamond sale period.

The three main characters each present separate ethical morality, the soldier of fortune gives
us an egoistic mind set, but gets softer as the movie closes to the end. The way the movie
presents both the understanding for the desire in egoism as well as showing that it is possible
to change and also show compassion a moral twist. The second character is a fisherman
presenting a more feminist ethical theory, showing much love for family and care for people,
even a man that is likely to steal from him.

Her fight for fairness and getting the west to open their eyes gives another moral angel to the
situation in Sierra Leone. This is interpreted as a sign that he is pushing on the correct buttons
and may be something that forces change. We do not believe we would change anything with
his movie, in order to reach the target market a combination of fiction and facts are needed.
This essay has proved that the use of child soldiers as well as trading conflict diamonds is
unethical and has asked the world to act as a solution; there is power within the people that
should be used to pressure changes to these issues.