Redefining Coexistence: Leadership, Pragmatism, and the Gaps in Diamond Grading Approaches | Ahmed Bin Sulayem

The global diamond industry has for years been accustomed to drawing clear boundaries that seemed impossible to cross. For years, the confrontation between natural diamonds and the alternative of lab-grown diamonds was presented as an existential struggle, a zero-sum game. However, a deep look at the highest decision-making centers in the global diamond industry reveals that these ideological trenches are rapidly giving way to a reality of commercial pragmatism. The modern market no longer rewards a dogmatic approach of total rejection, but demands an informed strategy on two parallel tracks, balancing the promotion of the diamond industry's interests with market reality.

This shift in perception is clearly reflected in the leadership of the institutions representing the industry worldwide. In May 2026, the World Diamond Council (WDC) entered an era of new leadership with the appointment of Ronnie VanderLinden as President and Anoop Mehta as Vice President. Both are key figures with significant weight in the natural diamond establishment, but what makes this pair of leaders so representative of our time is that neither of them views the lab-grown diamond (LGD) sector with hostility. On the contrary: the commercial and institutional activity of each of them testifies to a very pragmatic approach to the field, and proves that promoting the interests of the natural diamond industry can coexist with actual business activity in the lab-grown diamond sector.

Let's talk about VanderLinden. He is a veteran professional who entered the industry in 1977 as a diamond cutter, and simultaneously serves as President of the New York-based natural diamond manufacturer Diamex, as well as President of Pintura Lab Grown Diamonds. This is not just a representative role, but one of direct commercial involvement. VanderLinden's position reflects the pragmatism required by the market. He has publicly presented lab-grown diamonds not as an existential threat to natural diamonds, but as an entry-level product that can ultimately expand the jewelry market as a whole. He even noted, in a statement that became well-known in the industry, that if a consumer's journey begins with a man-made diamond and later leads them to purchase a natural diamond, then everyone benefits from it. This does not mean he legitimizes misleading marketing or dubious environmental claims. Under his leadership, industry bodies have rightly spoken out against misleading claims regarding carbon footprints. Nevertheless, he clearly recognizes the legitimacy of the product and its place in the market.

His colleague at the World Diamond Council, Anoop Mehta, brings with him more than fifty years of experience and status in the industry as President of the Bharat Diamond Bourse (BDB) and CEO of Mohit Diamonds. Although Mohit Diamonds does not trade directly in lab-grown diamonds, Mehta has made it clear in no uncertain terms that the company provides solutions to clients interested in producing rough lab-grown diamonds, and noted that the stigma attached to the field has dissipated. He wisely compares the market's development to the coexistence of smartwatches and traditional mechanical watches. Even more significant is the fact that in June 2025, Mehta was appointed Chairman and Independent Director at IGI, the International Gemological Institute, the world's leading body for grading lab-grown diamonds.

And here we arrive at the central structural fracture currently occupying the global diamond market: the question of grading and certificate issuance. Under Mehta's oversight of IGI's operations, a powerful global body with Belgian roots, whose shares are traded on the stock exchange and which is backed by Blackstone, the results of the first quarter of the 2026 fiscal year show that loose lab-grown diamonds accounted for 54% of its activity. IGI has taken an unequivocal professional stance. While critics try to diminish the importance of grading synthetic diamonds, IGI has resolutely defended its policy of applying the full traditional 4C grading scale — cut, color, clarity, and carat weight — to lab-grown diamonds, arguing that consumer trust relies first and foremost on complete transparency and clear disclosure of the stone's origin.

This position creates a sharp and fascinating gap between the central gemological institutions. While IGI maintains a strict reporting structure based on the four C metrics, the GIA (Gemological Institute of America) has moved to eliminate traditional terminology regarding lab-grown diamonds, classifying diamonds that meet requirements into broader categories of "premium" and "standard." At the same time, HRD Antwerp has gone even further and completely stopped issuing certificates for loose lab-grown diamonds, in an attempt to maintain a sharp dividing line between the world of natural diamonds and the world of lab-grown diamonds.

These gaps between the institutions, along with the leadership structure of the World Diamond Council, make it clear that the real debate is no longer about whether lab-grown diamonds have a right to exist, but about how their activity should be regulated, how they should be presented and their origin disclosed to consumers, and how they should be integrated into the market. Parallel activity in both fields does not indicate a contradiction or a conflict, but is a natural result of an evolving, multi-layered, and diverse market.

As we look toward the next decade of commodity trading, the global industry must adopt the approach of its veteran leaders: abandon the rhetoric of rejection, embrace full transparency regarding grading, and recognize that a sophisticated market can contain different forms of the same basic crystal structure to meet the different needs of consumers.

The author of the article is the Chairman and CEO of DMCC, the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre.