Is an international boycott the solution?

Kofi Annan argues for an international boycott on all minerals coming from the conflict zone in the east. Closing the trading channels will dry up the money being made in the mineral trade.

Such a boycott can only be implemented by the United Nations Security Council. With members as China on this Council, depending on any minerals coming from Africa, such a boycott is highly unlikely to happen. And even if so, Fatal Transactions argues that a boycott is only useful when it will close off all trading routes, not just the airports of Goma and Bukavu but also Lake Kivu and the borders with Rwanda and Uganda. Rwanda and Uganda are now profiting from the illegality of the trade as the minerals enter their countries illegal but exit legal, bringing in a lot of tax money. Moreover, the diggers will be hurt most by a boycott; their often only way of earning some money to survive, will be taken away.

Therefore a boycott needs to go hand in hand with increased humanitarian aid and protection of the local people who are trapped in the violent mining areas in the east.