|
The Food and Agriculture Organization thinks reducing barriers will
help the food problem today. Here is a very serious rebuttal.
Here is an excerpt. The full piece is below the fold.
On the contrary, the proposals made by the general secretary of the UN,
Ban Ki-Moon, to increase food production by 50% and to eliminate the
export limits imposed by some of the countries affected, only
reinforces the root causes of this crisis rather than addressing and
guaranteeing the food security of the majority of the people in the
global South.
********
FAO: more free trade, more hunger
by ESTHER VIVAS
Yesterday the high level summit of the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (the FAO) held in Rome on Food
Security ended. The conclusions of the gathering do not indicate a
change in the policy trends which have been in force these last years
and which have led to the current situation.
The declarations of good intentions made by various governments and the
promises of millions of euros to end hunger in the world are not
capable of ending the structural causes that have generated this
crisis. On the contrary, the proposals made by the general secretary of
the UN, Ban Ki-Moon, to increase food production by 50% and to
eliminate the export limits imposed by some of the countries affected,
only reinforces the root causes of this crisis rather than addressing
and guaranteeing the food security of the majority of the people in the
global South.
The monopoly of certain multinational corporations in each one of the
links in the chain of food production, from seeds to fertilizers to
marketing and distribution of what we eat, is something that was not
dealt with during this summit. However, despite the crisis, the
principle seed companies, Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta, have realized
a growing increase in profits as have the principle chemical fertilizer
corporations. The largest food processing companies such as Nestle and
Unilever have also announced an increase in benefits, though less large
that those who control the first rungs in the food system ladder. In
the same way the large distributors of food such as Wal-Mart, Tesco and
Carrefour have confirmed that their profits continue to rise.
The results of the FAO summit reflect the consensus reached among the
UN, the World Bank (WB), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to
maintain economic and trade policies of South-North dependency and to
support the agribusiness transnationals. The recommendations promoted
in favor of a greater opening of the markets of the South, to subsidize
food imports as part of development aid, and betting on a new green
revolution all point in this direction.
Excluded from the debate were those who work and care for the land, the
hands with whom our food policies ought to be placed, the men and women
family farmers. When representatives of farmer organizations tried to
present their proposals at the official inauguration of the summit,
they were removed by force. In high level meetings that preceded this
one, a greater participation of social collectives was permitted,
whereas now, before the gravity of the situation, the doors were kept
closed, a fact that has been denounced by the international network of
the Via Campesina.
A resolution of the crisis situation implies putting an end to the
current agricultural model and food system which puts the interests of
the large transnational corporations ahead of the food needs of
millions of people. Is it necessary to deal with the structural causes;
the neo-liberal policies that have been systematically applied in the
last 30 years, promoted by the WB, the IMF and the World Trade
Organization (WTO), with the U.S. and the European Union in front. Some
policies have meant an economic liberalization on a global scale, the
unrestrained opening of markets, and the privatization of lands
dedicated to local supply and a conversion of that land to export
monocultures, which have all led us to the grave situation of food
insecurity at the present time. According to the WB it is calculated
that 850 million people have been suffering hunger (prior to the
“crisis”) and that an additional 100 million will be added to this
group due to the crisis.
The way out of this crisis requires the regulating and controlling of
the market and of international trade; rebuilding national economies;
returning control of food production to the family farmers and
guaranteeing their access to land, seeds and water; getting agriculture
out of the free trade agreements and the WTO; and putting an end to the
speculation on hunger.
The market cannot solve this problem. To counter the declarations of
the number 2 at the FAO, José María Sumpsi, who affirmed that this is
an issue of supply and demand due to the rise in consumption in
emerging countries such as Indian, China and Brazil, we must remember
that never before has there been a more bountiful harvest in the world.
Today humanity produces three times what was produced in the 1960s,
while the population has only doubled. There is no production crisis in
agriculture, but the impossibility of accessing food by large
populations who cannot pay current prices. The solution cannot be more
free trade because, as has been demonstrated, more free trade implies
more hunger and less access to food. We do not want to throw more fuel
on the fire.
Esther Vivas is Co-Coordinator of “Supermarkets, No Thanks” and “Where is Fair Trade Headed?”
Published 06/06/2008
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed