Today, the argument that Botswana is being shortchanged rests on three primary pillars:
1. The Value of the "Run-of-Mine" Sales The current agreement allows De Beers to market the majority of Debswana’s production. The government has argued that the fees and royalties they receive do not reflect the true market value of the stones, especially as De Beers rebrands itself towards "ethical" and "conflict-free" diamonds. Botswana’s President Mokgweetsi Masisi has been vocal about this, suggesting that Botswana deserves a larger share of the pie because the diamonds are the foundation of De Beers' global reputation.
2. Beneficiation Limitations While rough diamonds are now aggregated in Botswana, the local cutting and polishing industry struggles to compete with established hubs in India and Israel. Critics argue that De Beers protects its traditional supply chains, leaving Botswana with the low-margin work of sorting while high-margin manufacturing remains offshore. The "raw deal" narrative suggests that Botswana is doing the heavy lifting of extraction while the true wealth generation happens elsewhere.
3. Market Dynamics and Monopoly Power For decades, De Beers held a near-monopoly on global diamonds. Today, that monopoly has eroded due to the rise of synthetic (lab-grown) diamonds and competition from Russian giant Alrosa. As De Beers’ market power wanes, Botswana is re-evaluating its reliance on the company. Some analysts argue that De Beers needs Botswana’s high-quality gems more than Botswana needs De Beers, and the current contract does not reflect this shifting leverage.
Negotiations for a new deal have been ongoing for over a year, and they have turned ugly.
Botswana is not asking for a tweak; it is asking for a revolution. President Masisi wants the state to leap from a passive mining partner to the apex predator of the value chain. He wants a dramatically increased share of rough stones—up to 50% of Debswana’s production—to be sold to the state directly. Furthermore, he wants those stones sold not to De Beers, but to a burgeoning local cutting, polishing, and jewelry manufacturing industry.
In short, Gaborone wants to become Antwerp or Mumbai. It wants to process the diamonds where they are dug.
De Beers, now majority-owned by Anglo American, is resisting. They argue that the global diamond market is fragile. They claim that flooding a landlocked country with rough stones that cannot be sold for top dollar would destroy value. Privately, industry insiders admit that De Beers is terrified of a precedent. If Botswana takes control of its own supply, what stops Canada, South Africa, or Namibia from doing the same?
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.
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.
Is Botswana getting a raw deal? Not compared to most resource-rich nations in Africa, which often see zero benefit from their minerals. Compared to the theoretical ideal—where a nation owns 100% of its resources and the downstream value chain—yes, Botswana is leaving billions on the table.
The coming months are critical. If Botswana secures a deal that gives it control over independent sales and a higher percentage of rough stones, it will set a new precedent for global resource nationalism. If it caves, the "gold standard" might start to look a little tarnished.
For now, Gaborone holds the cards. The question is whether De Beers is willing to pay the price to keep them.
What do you think? Should resource-rich nations control their own diamond destiny? Join the conversation in the comments below.
Follow The World News for ongoing coverage of the Africa trade corridors and global commodity markets. Today, the argument that Botswana is being shortchanged
Is Botswana Getting a Raw Deal From De Beers? For decades, the partnership between
and De Beers was hailed as the ultimate success story in African mining
. But as the global diamond market shifts, the question of whether Botswana is getting its fair share has moved from boardroom whispers to front-page news. The Changing Power Balance
Historically, De Beers controlled the lion's share of production, but the tide is turning. Under the new 10-year sales agreement signed in February 2025 , Botswana has secured a much larger "slice of the pie": Production Share: Okavango Diamond Company (ODC) —Botswana’s state-owned seller—now starts with Debswana’s production, a significant jump from the previous 25%. Future Growth: This share is scheduled to climb to by 2033, effectively giving Botswana equal selling power. Development Funding: De Beers has committed up to 10 billion Pula ($712 million)
to a "Diamonds for Development" fund to help diversify Botswana’s economy. Why "Raw Deal" Talk Persists
Despite these gains, critics and local leaders argue the nation remains vulnerable:
While the 2025 agreement improved Botswana's diamond sales share to 50% by 2035, the government argues the 15% stake in De Beers remains unbalanced given its 70% supply share. President Duma Boko is now seeking a majority stake in De Beers to secure control over global pricing and branding, with a bid deadline set for April 16, 2026. For more details, visit mining.com Anglo American
Botswana and De Beers signed a landmark 10-year sales agreement in February 2025, increasing the nation’s share of rough diamonds from 25% to 50% by 2035 and extending mining licenses to 2054. While designed to address economic imbalances, the deal operates amid significant market volatility and rising stockpiles, with some critics questioning if the terms sufficiently mitigate risks. Read the full details of the agreement on Reuters. Botswana's Diamond Stockpile Hits 12m Carats - IDEX Online
Is Botswana Getting a Raw Deal From De Beers Diamonds? For over half a century, the partnership between Botswana and De Beers has been hailed as one of the most successful public-private collaborations in the world. However, as the global diamond market undergoes seismic shifts, a critical question has emerged: Is Botswana getting a raw deal?
In February 2025, after seven years of tense negotiations, the two parties finally signed a transformational new 10-year sales agreement and a 25-year extension of mining licenses. While officials celebrate this "groundbreaking" deal, the underlying economic pressures and shifting power dynamics suggest a more complex reality. The Evolution of the Deal: From 25% to 50%
Under the previous long-term arrangement, Botswana’s state-owned Okavango Diamond Company (ODC) was entitled to just 25% of the rough diamonds produced by Debswana, the 50/50 joint venture between the government and De Beers. The new agreement fundamentally alters this balance:
Botswana has finalized a 10-year sales agreement and 25-year mining license extension with De Beers, boosting its production share to 30%—set to rise to 50%—and securing over $750 million in development funding . The landmark deal strengthens local beneficiation and positions Botswana to potentially take a controlling stake in De Beers as owner Anglo American divests . Read the full details of the agreement on Reuters. Is Botswana Getting a Raw Deal From De Beers Diamonds?
Is Botswana Getting a Raw Deal From De Beers Diamonds?
Botswana, a small landlocked country in Southern Africa, has been hailed as a success story in the diamond industry. The country's rich diamond deposits have made it one of the world's leading producers of the precious gemstone. However, recent developments have raised questions about whether Botswana is getting a fair deal from De Beers, the mining giant that has dominated the country's diamond industry for decades. Follow The World News for ongoing coverage of
A History of De Beers in Botswana
De Beers, founded by Cecil Rhodes in 1888, has been a major player in the diamond industry for over a century. The company's dominance in the industry has been well-documented, and its influence extends far beyond Botswana. In the 1960s, De Beers began exploring for diamonds in Botswana, and in 1971, the company discovered the Orapa diamond mine, which would become one of the largest diamond mines in the world.
Today, De Beers is the largest diamond mining company in Botswana, with a portfolio of mines that include Orapa, Jwaneng, and Venetia. The company's operations in Botswana account for a significant portion of the country's diamond production, and it is estimated that diamonds make up around 80% of Botswana's total exports.
The Mining Agreement
The mining agreement between De Beers and the government of Botswana has been the subject of much debate. The agreement, which was signed in 1971, gives De Beers the rights to extract diamonds from the Orapa mine for a period of 25 years. The agreement was later extended to cover the Jwaneng mine, and in 2004, the government of Botswana and De Beers signed a new agreement that extended the life of the Orapa mine until 2035.
Under the terms of the agreement, De Beers pays the government of Botswana a royalty of 10% on the value of diamonds extracted from the mines. However, critics argue that this royalty rate is too low, and that the government of Botswana is not getting a fair share of the revenue generated by the diamond industry.
The Debate Over Revenue Sharing
The debate over revenue sharing has been ongoing for several years. The government of Botswana has argued that it should receive a higher share of the revenue generated by the diamond industry, while De Beers has argued that its investment in the industry justifies its share of the revenue.
In 2019, the government of Botswana announced plans to increase its share of the revenue from diamond mining. The government proposed a new royalty rate of 15% on the value of diamonds extracted from the mines, and also announced plans to acquire a 24% stake in the Debswana Mining Company, which is the joint venture between De Beers and the government of Botswana.
The Impact on Botswana's Economy
The diamond industry has had a significant impact on Botswana's economy. The industry has created thousands of jobs, both directly and indirectly, and has generated significant revenue for the government. However, critics argue that the industry has also had a negative impact on the country's economy.
One of the main criticisms is that the diamond industry has made Botswana too dependent on a single commodity. This has made the country vulnerable to fluctuations in the global diamond market, and has limited the country's ability to diversify its economy.
The Human Cost
The diamond industry has also had a significant impact on the people of Botswana. The industry has created jobs and generated revenue, but it has also been criticized for its treatment of workers and its impact on local communities. By taking these steps, Botswana can ensure that
In 2018, a report by the human rights group, Global Witness, accused De Beers of failing to provide adequate compensation to communities affected by its mining operations. The report also accused the company of using security forces to intimidate and harass local communities.
Conclusion
The debate over whether Botswana is getting a raw deal from De Beers diamonds is complex and multifaceted. While the diamond industry has generated significant revenue for the government and created thousands of jobs, critics argue that the country is not getting a fair share of the revenue.
The government of Botswana has taken steps to increase its share of the revenue, but more needs to be done to ensure that the country benefits from its rich diamond deposits. The government must also prioritize the needs of local communities and ensure that the industry is operated in a responsible and sustainable manner.
As the world continues to demand more transparency and accountability from mining companies, De Beers and the government of Botswana must work together to ensure that the diamond industry benefits both the company and the country.
The Way Forward
So, what can be done to ensure that Botswana gets a fair deal from De Beers diamonds? Here are a few suggestions:
By taking these steps, Botswana can ensure that it gets a fair deal from De Beers diamonds and that the industry benefits both the company and the country.
Facts and Figures
Sources
This article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the issues surrounding De Beers' operations in Botswana. The article highlights the complexities of the diamond industry and the challenges faced by governments and mining companies in ensuring that natural resources benefit both the company and the country.
Following years of arguing they received a raw deal, Botswana is leveraging a landmark 2025 sales agreement to pursue majority control of De Beers amidst Anglo American's restructuring. As of April 2026, the government is seeking to acquire an 85% stake to transition from a junior partner to controlling owner of the diamond giant. For more details, visit Bloomberg.
Critics argue Botswana has already been getting a raw deal for 50 years. They point to the "Sightholder" system—an opaque, invitation-only club where a select few buyers purchase rough diamonds at De Beers-set prices.
"Botswana has been a glorified landlord," says Dr. Kebabonye T. Monagen, an economic historian at the University of Botswana. "They own the land and the resource, but De Beers has been the intellectual and logistical landlord. De Beers decides when to release stones, how many, and at what price to the cutters. Botswana gets a dividend, but not the strategic leverage."
Consider the numbers. In 2023, despite a slowdown, Debswana produced approximately 25 million carats. While Botswana’s treasury collected billions in taxes and dividends, the downstream revenue—the 200% markup that turns a rough stone into a polished engagement ring—almost entirely flowed to factories in India, China, and the diamond exchanges of New York and Tel Aviv.
