Monday, October 1, 2012


“Diamonds from a conflict area without papers is another definition of blood diamonds, and being in possession of the blood diamonds of Mr. Gilbert as well having signed an illegal contract with him made my need for diplomatic immunity more important than ever before,” Mads Brügger in the Central African Republic.
 In The Ambassador Mads Brügger acts as a diplomat from Liberia to the Central African Republic in order to unveil the blood diamond trade. A diplomat can travel across borders with 10 million dollars in his suitcase, so Brügger wants to exploit this fact by trying to see if he can transport this many diamonds. He goes through a series of steps to do this; including acquiring the proper paperwork from Liberia to do so, starting a fake match company to cover up his diamond trade, and visiting the precarious diamond mine. The beginning of film is almost a satire of the Central African Republic; that IT is so easy to exploit the people and the government, but as Brügger finds, it is very dangerous to play with fire. He gives his associate, Mr. Gilbert ten million dollars to get him diamonds. The contract he signed with Mr. Gilbert is illegal in itself, as well wishing to take diamonds back to Europe is illegal as well. After interviewing a white Frenchman, The Head of State Security in the Central African Republic, Guy-Jean le Foll Yamande, he is assassinated by unknown people. Brügger then finds himself in very dangerous waters, because he does not have proper credentials from Liberia, and fears assassination himself if the government decided to get rid of him.
This issue is important in Africa, because as Brügger mentions, there are 2,500 diplomats registered from Liberia, a huge number that is not necessary even for the amount of countries that Liberia deals with. The diamond trade in Africa is significant because every American woman wants the biggest diamond her fiancé can manage on her left finger. Diamonds are mined by men, women, and children, as seen in the film, and are guarded by guns, from sunrise to sunset. It seems amazing that just for one diamond, a person could work for an entire day, digging in the mud. The film also points to the Central African Republic’s colonizer of France and former president Jean Bokassa as reasons why the country is so corrupt. African nations have been corrupt since the beginnings of their nations, and the diamond trade in the Central African Republic is no different.
It is interesting to me that a white European is able to come into the Central African Republic and take enough diamonds to make him very rich for a long time. If say, a Chinese man were to come into the United States and start using US labor to dig up oil from the United States and bring it directly back to China, people in the United States would be appalled, much less let this happen in the first place. Locals in the Central African Republic do not know who to trust it seems. Do they trust their government who keeps them poor and impoverished? Or do they take jobs from foreigners digging up diamonds that will never be taxed by their country in order to put food on the table for their families?

2 comments:

  1. I wasn't aware there were regulations even existing within the diamond trade to be broken. SUPER interesting topic. I hadn't even thought of the idea that a Chinese man might not succeed at his mission (in this case getting diamonds) while a European would. This is an interesting case we see and it most definitely relates to colonization and prior history. This makes me wonder is Africa has become "accustomed" (like any cultural beliefs) to being used and taken advantage of by the Europeans. It's almost as if European's feel its ok to strip Africa of its resources and goods b/c well "its Africa". This is a troubled connotation I seem to feel exists after reading this blog post. The picture was really powerful, the idea this purposeful pose was calculated while it was rowed by African men is an embodiment of the connotation I was just describing. REALLY grabbing photo.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Katrina-

    First, of course, I am thrilled that you watched the film. I think you raise a bunch of interesting points about the film, but it would be interesting to consider whether his actions are exploitative and a form of entrapment. Is this movie a critique of CAR and its government OR is it a critique of Western exploitation of African resources?

    ReplyDelete