MEDIAWATCH: Food summit thwarts hope
Written by: Joanne Tomkinson

Poor Bangladeshi boys share rice beside a road in Dhaka. Rice prices are surging as governments and importers rush to stock up on the grain.
REUTERS/Rafiqur Rahman (BANGLADESH)
REUTERS/Rafiqur Rahman (BANGLADESH)
With a serious food crisis facing the world's poorest people, a U.N. food summit in Rome has ended with a promise to relieve hunger threatening one billion people. The final agreement calls for more food for the world's poor and an increase in agriculture production. But it has left many commentators frustrated at a lack of action on the most contentious and pressing issues. Kenya's Daily Nation newspaper says that, although there has been much finger pointing and talk about the problems, practical short-term answers to the global crisis have been seriously lacking. "It is not enough to blame the U.S. and Brazil for using food crops and sugar-cane to produce biofuels. It is not enough to make lofty declarations about intentions to raise food production in poor agrarian economies," the paper writes. More must be done to address the concerns of the poor Kenyan who is now unable to afford three square meals a day. "What is most urgent now is the answer to the question: What will the world do to ensure that close to a billion most vulnerable people are helped to stay alive?" the newspaper concludes. Radio Netherlands meanwhile writes of different concerns from Latin America. "A number of Latin American countries have accused the U.N. food summit in Rome of incorrectly diagnosing the root causes of a crisis threatening millions with starvation," the radio station says. Cuba, Argentina and Venezuela were among the strongest critics of the final declaration, the broadcaster says, all of them calling for changes in the way global trade rules operate. Venezuela, for example, insists that developing countries must be able to shield their markets from free trade when necessary, particularly when an influx of foreign imports could devastate local industry. Elsewhere in Africa concerns about rising food prices aren't focused on the outcome of the summit. Uganda's Daily Monitor calls on the Ugandan government to act to combat the effects of rising food prices in the country. The paper says the government should follow in the footsteps of Ghana's President John Kufur who recently announced a $1bn package of interventions to mitigate the impact of food scarcity in Ghana. "In some other African countries, the governments have been forced to act because of demonstrations and riots over the escalating food prices," the Monitor says. "The government of Uganda should not wait for that to happen here. The time to act is now." The Jerusalem Post says there are wider concerns about the role of developing country governments in perpetuating a food crisis. "The FAO (U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation), instead of linking the dire situations in the developing world to political abuse, chose to focus on blaming the West," Dr Isaac Kfir writes for the Israeli newspaper. "The reality, however, is that by demanding the removal of several corrupt and power-hungry leaders, as well as enforcing the peace in several other countries, one would save hundreds of millions of people," he says, pointing to North Korea and Zimbabwe as examples of countries in which political change would bring about a reduction in the numbers of hungry and starving. Meanwhile, for Britain's Independent newspaper the summit has failed to address much more fundamental causes of rising global food prices. The amounts pledged at the summit are too small to stimulate a "green revolution" in agriculture according to the paper, and delegates failed to tackle Western agricultural subsidies and import tariffs that penalise poor farmers. Furthermore, no progress has been made on biofuels which are responsible for driving up prices as productive land is given over to growing food rather than fuel. The measures needed aren't rocket science according to the paper, but "scandalously, this summit has broken up with its participants only apparently resolved for inaction".
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
3 responses to “MEDIAWATCH: Food summit thwarts hope”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.





09 Jun 2008 07:35:04 GMT
The currnet food situation poses a much greater risk than the diplomatic corp seems to be capable of grasping. A volcanic eruption on the order of the 1816 valcano would condim at least a billion people to death. The joint resolution should call for more global warming. Ice melting under worst case models could raise sealevel by 40 feet and damage many countries but the worst of the credible models estimate this to be a three thousand year process. That is the worse case. A sharp global cooling on the order of 1306 or 2286 BC or even a major volcano would distroy civilization as it currently exists.
09 Jun 2008 07:36:35 GMT
What on earth is the point in spending who knows how much on a conference for an organisation that has no power with which to implement any of the fundamental issues/causes/soloutions discussed? Not to mention the fact, which reflectively is at the root of the problem, attended by by people who have no intrest in the agenda of the conference and are only there to network for their own ends (or possiably just an expenses covered trip)
08 Oct 2008 15:50:30 GMT
Ian,
The point is that they get to travel to fabulous cities. Stay in fancy hotels. Feast on exotic cuisine.