After "War on Terror" and "War for Oil" comes "War for Food"?

News Type: Event — Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:17 PM EDT

world-news, food, hunger, food-crisis, food-riots

petercasier

Food riots in Argentina

Food riots in Bangladesh

Food riots in Haiti

Food riots in Mozambique

Food riots in Mexico

Food riots in Egypt

Food riots in India

In the past months, I have been posting regularly about the global food crisis:
- Oil, Biofuel, World Hunger and Crimes Against Humanity. - The Global Food Crisis: A Perfect Storm - The Food Crisis: A Global Overview

Those of you who have been following this column for a while know I work for a humanitarian agency, so automatically my view of news articles is biased: scanning news bulletins I am rather sensitive to possible lurking crisis, be it armed conflicts, natural disasters or plain economic issues that could cause humanitarian problems. Plus of course, this is our job, this is what we do for a living: trying to spot, mitigate and react to humanitarian crisis in the making or unfolding.

On top of this, working for a food aid agency, the issue of raising food prices, the dilemma of biofuel production versus food production, changing weather patterns decreasing the food production are automatically issues which catch my eyes faster.

So I have been asking myself the question: "Is the global food crisis really that big an issue, or is it blown out of proportion by the media, amplified by my built-in sensitivity to food aid issues?".

Over the past weeks, I have been scanning the media rigorously. A few months ago, I set up a Pageflakes newsfeed tool which takes RSS feeds from about 100 news sources: Western and non-Western media, citizen journalism and social bookmarking sites. Scanning those articles, I can state objectively: the "food crisis" issue has been popping up more regularly, and it is not part of my imagination.

The worrying factor is also a trend I have seen: Starting from "early warning" signs from humanitarian agencies, more and more reports come up about food riots in different countries, to -and that is what is really worrying me- articles that predict the potential global food supply shortages or inaccessibility of food (due to the sharply inflated prices), might lead governments to act in a drastic way.
Government steps being taken are to close their borders for food exports, containing food prices by extensive subsidies, or cancelling these due to the long term unsustainability, and bilateral agreements between countries to 'ensure a secure food supply'... Worrying. Reminds me of the same measures countries take to secure the supply of oil resources.

Now the apotheose of it all, and what causes me nightmares is the more frequent recurring link being made between food shortages (and all the related issues like global warming decreasing food production, biofuel consuming food, etc..), security and armed conflicts. And it not merely in titles like "Food Fights", but also in contents. Some examples:

[...] farmers [in Sudan] continue to expand. Their expansion is arguably the real root cause of the current conflict [in Darfur] (Article: Climate change is not an excuse for genocide.)
The long-term consequences of neglecting environmental deterioration, water shortages, and increased competition over scarce resources will lead to greater conflict and instability. Reducing the risk of food-related conflict will require a comprehensive plan that targets the environment and ensures an equitable distribution of resources. (Article: Rising food prices threaten global security. )
Rising food prices could spark worldwide unrest and threaten political stability, the UN's top humanitarian official warned yesterday after two days of rioting in Egypt over the doubling of prices of basic foods in a year and protests in other parts of the world. (Article: Food price rises threaten global security)
"Resource based conflicts are not new: they are literally as old as the hills. But in climate change we have a new and potentially disastrous dynamic." (Article: Climate change and security)
"If one country after the other adopts a 'starve-your-neighbor' policy, then eventually you trade smaller shares of total world production of agricultural products, and that in turn makes the prices more volatile" (Article: Tensions rise as world faces short rations)
The headlines of the past month suggest that skyrocketing food prices are threatening the stability of a growing number of governments around the world. (Article: How Hunger Could Topple Regimes)

And then you might think I am going completely nutter to quote Nostradamus: "Famine and fighting will set in. Countries will fight with each other over surplus food: India and China will march to seize the corn and wheat fields of Russia and eastern Europe."

So tell me: am I a doomsday preacher or are we really heading for a period of armed conflicts, not as part of the "war on terror", or the "war for oil", but a "war for food"?

Article originally posted on "The Road to the Horizon"

14 Votes
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

petercasier's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: Activism, Anti-War, Disaster!, Foodies!, Humanitarian Crises, International Aid Workers, United Nations politics, Worldviews
Regions: none

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

3.3

2.2

0.7

{"commentId":1687202,"authorDomain":"melonhead"}

urbane gorilla

If it is true that war is diplomacy by other means, then a fear of war ought to be a call to diplomacy. Sadly, this seems to be the fallout of the "global economy" in which competition to make money devalues the basic humanity of the poor, a problem which crosses all political and national boundaries. The problem is not lack of foodstuffs, nor the worldwide supply of well-watered arable land; the problem is indifference of the powerful to the problems powerless. Unfortunate, too, is that diplomacy is not a useful currency in the current Carnegian swell of unfettered market economies. I truly believe this is a solvable problem, although I don't have the knowledge as to how.

{"commentId":1687202,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"melonhead"}

2 votes

#1 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:32 PM EDT

{"commentId":1687285,"authorDomain":"gpolya"}

Gideon Polya

Excellent article, Peter - I applaud your humanity and your writing about the worst immediate problem facing the world, the global food price crisis.

Urbane gorilla is spot on: "

the problem is indifference of the powerful to the problems powerless

In January 2008 I was part of a BBC broadcast together with Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen (Harvard) and other scholars that exposed the WW2 Bengal Famine that killed 6-7 million Indians in Bengal and adjoining provinces when the price of rice doubled and then finally quadrupled - those who could not pay for food perished under a merciless British colonial administration (see: WW2 Bengali Holocaust, Bengal Famine ).

The prices of rice, wheat and corn have doubled in the last year - the world is facing a re-run on a 100-fold greater scale of the WW2 Bengal Famine as prices are driven up by a combination of US, UK and EU biofuel diversion (biofuel perversion), climate change (drought) and globalization ( the rich can afford to buy food to feed their cars and livestock) - UK Chief Scientist Professor John Beddington FRS says "billions" are under threat from biofuel diversion; top UK climate scientist Professor James Lovelock says over 6 billion will die this century due to unaddressed climate change (see: Global food crisis. US, UK, EU biofuel & CO2 threaten billions ).

The solution is respect for what Professor Sen famously called "entitlement" to food for the 4 billion humans who are presently malnourished - of these ALREADY 16 million die avoidably every year due to deprivation (see: Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950 ).

{"commentId":1687285,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"gpolya"}

#1.1 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:04 PM EDT

{"commentId":1687422,"authorDomain":"melonhead"}

urbane gorilla

I've seeded an article from The Economist which points out that increased prosperity brings an increased demand for meat, so the diversion of food crops to animal feed may be playing a bigger role than that of biofuels. More importantly, the article states that this years cereal crop is the biggest in history by 89million tonnes. So there is no shortage, even taking into account biofuels and meat consumption (which by the way is most dramatically up not in the developed world - we being pretty well sated - but the developing). Hunger in the face of shortage is tragic; in the face of abundance it is criminal, and the blame cannot fall solely on the West by a long shot.

I am sick up to here of the "West is bad guy" simplification of the world situation that I see on newsvine. The more I read world news, the more I see that assigning white and black hats to the various principals just doesn't work, not by region, politics, nationality, ethnicity - nothing. The world's two most populous nations are poised as nascent economic powerhouses, and the worldwide GDP has actually increased. The implications of this economic shift need to be met thoughtfully and without prejudice.

{"commentId":1687422,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"melonhead"}

#1.2 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:05 PM EDT

{"commentId":1687650,"authorDomain":"gpolya"}

Gideon Polya

urbane gorilla - the "blame" lies in the globalized MARKET mechanism. As Nobel Prize-winning Economist and famine expert Professor Amartya Sen says it is the PRICE of food that kills in famines (see: Bengal Famine - and that is what is killing millions each year already today who cannot afford to buy the food they need.

{"commentId":1687650,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"gpolya"}

#1.3 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:28 PM EDT

{"commentId":1690557,"authorDomain":"melonhead"}

urbane gorilla

What I am trying to suggest is, historically as well as in the present, "blame" lies all over the place. Hugo Chavez has manipulated grain supplies at election time (Economist article), US price supports impeded competition from African farmers - socialist, capitalist, communist, East, West, non-aligned - Advantage-taking seems to accompany power. how to build trans-national checks and balances is a challenge. If everybody is a little disappointed with the results, then probably the right thing will have been done.

{"commentId":1690557,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"melonhead"}

#1.4 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:17 PM EDT

{"commentId":1687539,"authorDomain":"iqballatif"}

iqbal.latif

Great article..

I think it is the most important issue..
http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_news/2008/04/13/1427738-vultures-waiting-for-our-children-to-die-should-be-killed-now-?threadId=249401&cmt=1687538#c1687538

{"commentId":1687539,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"iqballatif"}

#2 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:43 PM EDT

{"commentId":1687548,"authorDomain":"petercasier"}

petercasier

It is a fact that last year, there was a deficit food production. That is why the cereal reserves are the lowest ever all over the world.

It is also a fact that the drive for biofuel and animal feed dramatically increased.

I assume it is also a fact that the cereal crops last year were the biggest in history, but the question is how much of that is directly used as food for people, not as biofuel or food for animals (which produce 1 calorie of meat for 8 calories of cereal they are fed). It is estimated that we will still face a net food deficit at the end of the day, even with the record production.

We should also not forget that the price of food has increased partly due to the cost of the production (due to the record prices of fuel).

So EVEN if we would produce enough food at this moment, we still would face the problem that "food is in the shops, but the poorer and less developed countries could not afford it. As the Economist article quoted states: food is 3% of a family budget in richer countries, 20% of the poor countries, and probably even much more in the poorest of countries (we have data it is over 50% of a family budget in some countries). Proof of the matter is the recent food riots everywhere.. And it is not just because the price of spaghetti or tortilla has gone up...

My fear is now that clearly food has become a pricey and scarce commodity, it would become a major factor in the world political power scheme, and to secure food for the people, to avoid either massive hunger, or massive protests leading to pressure on the governments, the same governments would start to go at any length to provide food. Up to what length would they go to secure food? China is already buying/leasing massive amounts of lands in Asia to secure its food production.. Will others too? And eventually wage war over arable land?

Two thing seems to be for sure: - at this moment we do not seem to be able to produce enough 'food commodities' to cater for human AND animal consumption AND biofuel, all at the same time.
- the poorest will suffer the most (and here comes the automatic distinction between West and the rest)...

Interesting article in the Economist by the way, Urban Gorilla!

{"commentId":1687548,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"petercasier"}

2 votes

#3 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:46 PM EDT

{"commentId":1688029,"authorDomain":"RETLAW"}

RETLAW

peter---thank you for bringing this discussion to newsvine.

I have, for some time, been concerned about three aspects of our world:
1-Throughout the world, oil is a finite resource. No new oil is being created. And, according to a discussion that I heard last week on NPR, peak oil production happened in 2005. This means that while demand for oil is increasing, production is declining. New oil source areas may be found, but don't count on it.

2-Everything moves under power created by oil. Whether on ships, on trains, or tractor-trailers, oil provides the power by combustion. This means that as oil becomes scarcer, and its cost rises, the costs of everything will also rise. Food is among the dearest of items moved by oil (and to plant it).

3-As global warming proceeds, rising sealevel will force low-lying areas to be evacuated, both removing people, and the land from production. Further, the effects of desertification cannot be predicted yet, so we don't know whether good soil for growing will diminish or increase. But can we take that chance; we need to be looking into it.

Further,
4-Although production of electricity has increased from wind and solar, that will not be adequate. Both have times when they are interrupted: night removes solar power, calmness diminishes wind power. I believe that the US should be constructing new nuclear power plants. Only one is in the works here; and ten years necessary for time from inception to completion.
and
5-The world population is burgeoning. Not likely to slow down; especially since the Catholics (and others) think that new human life is so precious that reproduction should not be interrupted or terminated.

All in all, I don't have a good feeling about the next fifty years. Could be that both a great war and a great famine are coming at us. I sincerely hope that neither ever happens.

{"commentId":1688029,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"RETLAW"}

#4 - Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:58 PM EDT

{"commentId":1689381,"authorDomain":"pmags"}

magz

Well maybe farmers in the poorest countries finally get a break. On the other hand, here in the US, given the commodity prices, should agricultural subsidies be pulled back? My own fear is that what once was productive agricultural land is being developed for housing.

{"commentId":1689381,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"pmags"}

1 vote

#5 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:43 AM EDT

{"commentId":1689401,"authorDomain":"melonhead"}

urbane gorilla

This is what the Economist article notes. The cost of grain is not an isolated issue; fair pricing and income stagnation amongst the poor is. It is possible food is underpriced and over subsidized in wealthy producing nations. Leveling the playing field for poor farmers would provide a solution with growth potential, I think.

{"commentId":1689401,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"melonhead"}

#5.1 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:48 AM EDT

{"commentId":1689904,"authorDomain":"pmags"}

magz

International trade negotiations are slower than a snail on barbiturates, so I figure it has to come from the Congress. That is going to be difficult, given the presidential campaigns.

{"commentId":1689904,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"pmags"}

1 vote

#5.2 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:52 AM EDT

{"commentId":1692197,"authorDomain":"mandygabriel"}

mandygabriel

Teaching new ways and reverting back to the old and tested ways to grow our own food is the only way to stop hunger and food shortages in the world. Permaculture and self sufficient systems have been proved to work in California and at the Center for alternative technology in Wales. The world trade organization has manipulated the system of food production and actually created the problems of food shortage today. By giving a few farmers large areas to farm and driving the small farmers into the cities for work has created the problem of food shortage. We need to focus on giving the land back to the people and helping them become self sufficient. Give a person a plot of land, seeds, and animals they will feed their family and be able to sell locally to be able to continue with their lives. We have too much in some parts of the world and not enough in others, the distribution of food is also contributing to the global warming problems. Keep it local.

{"commentId":1692197,"threadId":"249522","contentId":"1428212","authorDomain":"mandygabriel"}

#6 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:29 PM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"249522","isPrivate":false}

Amid mounting food crisis, governments fear revolution of the hungry	World Socialist Web Site	Tue Apr 15	0
UN urges action on food crisis	AL JAZEERA	Tue Apr 15	0
US in $200m food crisis response	BBC News	Tue Apr 15	0
Food Fights	World Press Review	Sat Apr 12	3
Bill Moyers Journal . Hunger in America \| PBS	PBS	Sat Apr 12	0

PETERCASIER

Backyard

After "War on Terror" and "War for Oil" comes "War for Food"?

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF: