NEW GREEN REVOLUTION-RUSE FOR PUSHING GM TECHNOLOGY INTO AFRICA?

A hungry world is definitely not a place for peace and harmony and the the origin of the so call economic aid from rich countries lies in this irrefutable fact. while tall promises are made from time to time in multilateral meetings and conferences, the follow up action invariably never matches the rhetoric. True, the people in poor countries owe a lot to the developed countries for food aids which serve the purpose of keeping starvation away from the doors of many famished families but the situation can be improved further if the promised aid is delivered as per the commitments made and without any strings attached. Unfortunately a country like the US, considered the most powerful in the world, has a "stingy" and "with strings attached" policy in releasing its aid as reflected by the following critique by dispassionate observers: 

"In March 2009, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed its Global Food Security Act (SB 384). The legislation, known as the Lugar-Casey Act, aims to focus on longer-term agricultural development, and restructure aid agencies to better respond to crises. Funding for agricultural development - some US$7.7 billion worth - would be directed in large part to genetically modified crop research.[1] In other words, food aid policy for the first time mandates the use of genetic modification technologies. Engineered crops will need engineered seeds - seeds that are no longer a result of natural cross-pollination. The Lugar-Casey Act represents the biggest project in agriculture since the original Green Revolution in the 1950s and 1960s. Fifty years ago, developing countries had yearly agricultural trade surpluses of over US$1 billion. Today the Southern food deficit has grown to over US$11 billion per year,[2] helping create dependency on the volatile international markets that led to the 2008 food crisis.[3] The first Green Revolution increased global food production by 11 per cent in a very short time, but per capita hunger also increased equally as much.[4] How could this be? Green Revolution technologies are expensive. The fertilisers, seeds, pesticides, and machinery needed to cash in on productive gains put the technology out of reach of most small farmers, increasing the divide between rich and poor in the developing world. Poor farmers were driven out of business and into poverty-stricken urban slums. The new Green Revolution highlighted in the Lugar-Casey Bill suffers from all these same problems. This time, however, the genetically-engineered seeds will be under patent and privately owned by the biotechnology corporations that monopolise the seed industry, and farmers will have to buy new seed each year.[5] R&D dollars in the millions go to engineered climate-smart seeds as a solution to food security under climate stress. DuPont, Monsanto, Syngenta and Limagrain control 29 per cent of the world market in seeds, with Monsanto controlling almost all of the genetically engineered seed. The Gates and Rockefeller foundations' partnership with Monsanto to bring an Asian-type Green Revolution to the African continent will invest US$150 million into the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). On its website, the Alliance describes itself as a 'dynamic partnership working across the continent to help millions of small-scale farmers and their families lift themselves out of poverty and hunger ... focusing on key aspects of African agriculture: from seeds, soil health and water to markets, agricultural education and policy'."

While as a country the US has every right to adopt GM foods for its citizens, it is nothing but travesty of justice that this donor country tries to export its GM technology from the monopolistic MNCs to the impoverished countries in African continent. As rightly pointed out by the critics, the farmers in Africa are being pushed from the "frying pan to the fire" because as it is they find it difficult to replicate even the proven but input intensive Green Revolution of Asia. The GM technology, if forced on them, will make them perennial slaves of the exploitative seed suppliers based in the US for generations to come. World must resist this neo colonism and find sustainable alternatives to solve the hunger crisis of the continent.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ANOTHER G8 MEETING-WILL SOME THING CONCRETE HAPPEN?

In a world sharply divided by economic power, most countries coming under the "poor nation' status find them selves in dire straights to meet the minimum food needs of their population. Most of them are located in Africa, Asia and South American continents but those in Africa are considered most impoverished, measured by any yardstick. Colonial countries like France and England, which controlled most of these countries for many years, did not do much to improve the lot of people under their yolk but exploited their wealth to enrich themselves. Though pious declarations are made from time to time by rich countries regarding their intention to economically help these countries through financial aid and soft loans, very little has happened at the ground level. The G8 countries, the rich man's club of the world, meeting in Italy in 2009 pledged assistance to the tune of $ 22 billion for improving the economic conditions of population in Africa but this has not been fulfilled undermining their credibility. The recent meeting in May 2011 in France was anticipated to address this issue and further reaffirm their commitment to the welfare of poor and downtrodden people of the African continent. It is unfortunate that this issue was by-passed and in stead focus was only on two countries, Egypt and Tunisia where political upheavals have taken place.

Fan said, "When the G8 met in Italy, they committed $22 billion to support smallholder agriculture in developing countries, particularly Africa. Today, that commitment is still there [but] they have not met much of the commitment yet." He warned the world is poised to have another food crisis, unless the pledge is paid in full. "I think it's already coming. In the last 10 months, the wheat price has increased by a hundred percent. Maize price has also increased by 100%. In addition, prices for meat, dairy products have also increased," he said. When food prices increase many poor, not only just the consumers, but also even producers, suffer," he said, and added, "If it happens again, we will probably lose the progress we have made in the last decade or so." He warned women and children are the most vulnerable to volatile prices and markets. Hunger and malnutrition, he said, can permanently damage a child's brain development. "We need to fix this problem." He rejected the idea of spending cutbacks on agriculture because of the global recession. "Agriculture is so critical in terms of hunger reduction, poverty reduction and also in terms of future growth. If we do not invest in agriculture…more people will suffer from hunger and poverty," he said.

The thinking to cut down on agricultural aid is fraught with danger because food riots, as they have happened in 2008, will become a regular feature due to recurring food shortages and high prices of staples. Besides, attempts by transnational agricultural giants with unshakable monopoly on new technologies see Africa as a "fertile field" to establish their seed "hegemony". Added to this, neo-rich countries like Saudi Arabia, China and others are "usurping" millions of hectares of land in Africa and South America for cultivating food crops for use in their own countries for insulating their population from food shortages. Unless the small and marginal farmers in poor countries are "enabled" to derive maximum benefits from their small holdings through new, innovative and efficient farming technologies, there will not be any peace on earth, with food riots spreading all around. It is high time that G8 countries realize this truth and honestly try to diffuse the situation through massive commitment to agriculture in these countries.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ECONOMIC AID FOR DEVELOPMENT-DONORS' CREDIBILITY AT STAKE!

Countries, who are low in the list of those based on prosperity are afflicted by many economic and developmental constraints and if those well-to-do fellow nations do not give a helping hand poverty, malnutrition and diseases are going to over come this planet one day or the other. Economic assistance and cooperation are key prerequisites for uplifting the living standards of people living in these countries and developed nations have every thing to gain by extending such help to their less fortunate brethren that will ensure peace and tranquility across the world.

"This is not just an issue of morality. It is also one of strategic leverage. Rich industrial nations have promised even more aid to developing countries to try to persuade them to curb carbon emissions — stop chopping down their forests and switch from dirty coal to cleaner fuels — and tackle climate change. Given the G-8's track record, poorer nations are right to be skeptical. In 2005, the rich nations pledged to increase development aid by $50 billion in real terms by 2010, to roughly $145 billion per year in today's money. Now the time has come and they are $20 billion short, according to estimates from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Of the $25 billion in additional aid promised to Africa, only $11 billion has been delivered".

The thinking that human race on this planet is united in safe guarding its uninterrupted existence must inculcate a feeling of universal brotherhood, collectively striving to bring about equality amongst the inhabitants. There might be many historic reasons why some countries lag behind others in the developmental scale and unless there is global cooperation no country, how ever affluent it may be, can close its eyes to events happening out side its borders. The world has become a "global village" and it is foolish to imagine that one can insulate oneself from the global happenings, good or bad.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

EUROPE'S BENEVOLENCE-PAKISTAN TO BOOST FOOD PRODUCTION

Pakistan seems to be a favorable ally of the western world as evidenced by the uninterrupted flow of economic aid for arms as well as alms. The latest in the queue to shower the "aid" is the European Union which is extending financial help to raise agricultural productivity in 17 districts in that country by 30%. This aid is supposed to be for procuring quality seeds, fertilizers, better irrigation management and agricultural machinery. Why Pakistan which is in the forefront in Asia in using modern agricultural technology needs assistance from EU defies logic.

"The EU "Food Facility" is the European Union's 1 billion euros (Rs 113 billion) response to the food crisis, showing Europe's firm commitment to help poor countries boost agricultural production, especially in a time that hunger was on the rise even more because of the global economic crisis. This support comes when Pakistan had just produced a bumper crop of 24 million tonnes of wheat—2 million above its nationwide requirement in food. Yet prices remain stubbornly high, especially in rural areas, where most food insecure people live. The food may be there, but for many, it is too expensive to buy, he maintained".

Whole world knows how 'efficient' Pakistan is in diverting foreign aids for building its armed forces to fight its arch enemy, India in a hypothetical war. No matter how much money is poured into that country, the conditions of the poor are not going to change with staple foods becoming dearer with each passing day. The theory that by bridging the gap between demand and supply of staples the prices can be brought down is a fallacy because food "inflation" in many parts of Asia has many other dimensions, not appreciated by the donor countries.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com