Diamond independence and carat control
Lewanika Timothy | Thursday October 2, 2025 09:44
De Beers and Botswana are often lauded “Siamese twins”, double bodies that have mirrored each other from the yesteryears of their matrimony in 1969. Along the path like any marriage, the duo has had spats of their own, with Botswana consistently spewing one demand and desire: more control of the diamond value chain.
A peep into the annals of history shows that the country is still on a trek for a different form of freedom, diamond independence. As this article is being penned, global diamond De Beers is up for sale with the current majority shareholder, Anglo America, eying an exit. Bidders have thrown their horses into the race and Botswana wants to seize this opportunity to gain diamond independence.
Before digging into this diamond story, perhaps a bit of melody may help. Remember the lyrical maestro Letta Mbulu and her immaculate rendition, Not Yet Uhuru? This was a political battle cry that was meant to open the eyes of many South Africans to the shackles that remained on their feet and hands post the collapse of the apartheid rule in 1994. Perhaps in the same breadth, Botswana's 1966 Independence will remain an incomplete feat until the country controls its diamond destiny.
David Magang, one of Botswana’s most prominent political luminaries and custodians of the country’s institutional memory, recounted in his seminal book “Delusions of Grandeur,” the lesser-known rift between former President Festus Mogae and Nicky Oppenheimer, the then-majority shareholder in De Beers.
According to Magang, the clash was unprecedented: Mogae threatened to pull the plug on De Beers’ operations in Botswana if the company refused to bring diamond beneficiation into the country. It was a jolt out of the blue, but, as Magang noted, a demand long overdue. For decades, Botswana had supplied the stones that kept De Beers afloat, yet reaped only a fraction of the value once those diamonds were cut, polished, and sold.
The imbalance remains striking. Botswana’s diamonds have always been De Beers’ lifeline, responsible for the bulk of its revenues. Yet according to three of the country’s five presidents, the nation deserved more, and still does
In 2006, government concluded a multi-year agreement deal with De Beers, which committed to helping Botswana to beneficiate her diamonds. Under the terms of the agreement, the Diamond Trading Centre, which was based in London based, would shift to Botswana and more beneficiation would take place locally.
During Masisi`s tenure, Botswana took the war to De Beers’ doorstep, in a gambit that garnered international attention. Masisi shot from the hip and called the Botswana, De Beers marriage “a deal fraudulent and fraught with error”.
Diamond negotiations stalled in 2023 when Masisi threatened to walk out on De Beers if his terms were not acceded to. His demand was for Botswana to secure greater access to the values in the diamond industry’s pipeline, beyond simply being a miner of the precious stones.
The biggest worry for Masisi was the clause that prohibited Botswana from participating in the diamond value chain beyond the sale of rough of diamonds. In remarks at the time, he said he wanted the world to come to Botswana, to set up a vertical integration model for diamond development
For many Batswana, these words were spine-chilling. For decades, the nation’s citizens had been left in the dark about the fine print of agreements that underpinned their entire economy. But Masisi saw no reason to shield them. To him, exposing the “dark side” of the deal was a patriotic duty.
“I told the CEO of Anglo and De Beers that if they come back thinking we will sign the same deal, they better get out of my Cabinet room and the deal is off,” he said.
In 2020 at the height of COVID-19, the President watched together with his administration, as the pandemic set ablaze the manifesto and promises he had campaigned with and won, replacing that hope for Batswana with the second worst economic collapse in the country’s history, the depletion of critical government savings and an embittered population. The kitty was empty with no hope of being replenished soon and the government had to find more ways to generate more cash for the future.
“It was a bad agreement, it was bad for Botswana. We got too little and De Beers got far too much out of a bad agreement. It was based on a lack of knowledge and sophistication in negotiating deals on our side. “We were taken advantage of by our very own partner,” he said
Snap tick to reality, the kitty is empty again and President Boko has made fresh calls for increasing the stake of Botswana in De Beers. With Anglo’s exit, the field has been thrown open. A fresh opportunity and danger looms. President Boko has already sharpened his rhetoric, calling for Botswana to increase its stake in De Beers and secure a greater share of the wealth that has for too long slipped through its fingers.
The country is clearly on a path for a new form of freedom and as 60 years of independence approach, the mind can but wonder into whose hands the diamond fortunes will land.
The diamond independence first demanded by Mogae, championed fiercely by Masisi, and now echoed by Boko is no longer a distant ideal. It is a necessity born of economic survival. The question is no longer whether Botswana should demand more, but whether it can afford not to.