Historically, De Beers mined the rough diamonds in Botswana and shipped them to London, where they were sorted, aggregated, and sold to manufacturers. The high-value activities—sorting, cutting, polishing, and retail—happened elsewhere, keeping the bulk of the economic profit outside Botswana’s borders. Video Title Big Boobs Indian Stepmom In Saree Link [UPDATED]
However, the definition of a "raw deal" is changing. Botswana is no longer the fledgling nation of 1966; it is a sophisticated economic player demanding its rightful share of the value chain. The current negotiations are not just about royalty percentages; they are about the soul of the industry. 1bggz9tcn4rm9kbzdn7kprqz87sz26samh Patched - 3.79.94.248
However, as the landmark 2011 sales agreement comes up for renegotiation, a critical question is echoing through Gaborone and global financial markets: Is Botswana actually getting a raw deal? To understand the current tension, one must acknowledge the history. Unlike many African nations that fell victim to the "resource curse"—where mineral wealth fuels corruption and conflict—Botswana utilized diamond revenues to build infrastructure, fund free education, and develop a thriving tourism sector. The partnership was formalized through Debswana , a 50/50 joint venture between the government and De Beers.
While De Beers moved its "sights" (sales events) to Gaborone in 2013, a symbolic victory for the nation, critics argue this was a logistical shift rather than a structural economic transformation. Botswana still sells the rough stones. The lucrative downstream industries—where a rough stone becomes a polished jewel sold in a boutique in New York or Hong Kong—remain largely out of reach for the Batswana economy.
If De Beers accedes to Botswana’s demands for more local processing and greater supply control, the "partnership" will finally evolve into equality. If they resist, Botswana may well decide that the "raw deal" is no longer a deal at all.
Why the aggression now? Because Botswana finally has leverage. De Beers' supply from other major sources, like South Africa and Canada, has dwindled. Furthermore, sanctions on Russian diamonds (Alrosa) have tightened global supply. Botswana is currently the world’s largest producer of diamonds by value. Without Botswana’s output, De Beers would struggle to maintain its dominance in the market. While the argument for a better deal is strong, the "raw deal" narrative has a flip side. De Beers provides more than just a checkbook. They provide the global marketing machine—the famous "A Diamond is Forever" campaigns—that sustains the value of the stones.
For decades, the relationship between the government of Botswana and the diamond giant De Beers has been touted as the poster child for resource management in Africa. It is a narrative of partnership: Botswana provided the geology, De Beers provided the expertise, and together they transformed one of the world’s poorest nations into a stable, middle-income democracy.
However, analysts point out that De Beers pays royalties and taxes that are competitive, but perhaps not maximized for the producer's benefit. As the global diamond market fluctuates and synthetic (lab-grown) diamonds threaten natural prices, Botswana is seeking to secure a higher "floor" price or a larger volume allocation to sell independently. By relying heavily on De Beers' marketing machinery, Botswana arguably remains a tenant in its own house, renting out its soil rather than truly owning the product. The current renegotiation is arguably the most significant in the partnership's 54-year history. Botswana’s President, Mokgweetsi Masisi, has taken a hardline stance, suggesting the government could walk away if terms do not improve.