[The Hindu, India]
Hindustan Times, India
'Eat Your
Words, Mr. Bush!'
"These comments are brazen
admissions by the industrialized West that their levels of prosperity are
dependent on poverty and malnutrition in the developing world."
By Sitaram Yechury
May 8, 2008
India
- Hindustan Times - Original Article (English)
George W. Bush’s proclivity
to tread on the absurd is amazing. Recently, he sought to blame the Indian
people for the global food crisis by saying, “[India’s] middle-class is bigger
than our entire population ... When you start getting wealth, you demand better
food ... and prices ... go up.”
Many believe his
"insights" concerning food grain were inspired by his trusted
lieutenant, Condoleezza Rice. And rely he did - on the intemperate comments
Rice made a day earlier: “Improvement in the diets of people, for instance, in
China and India” is contributing to the global food crisis.
Not to be left behind, the
European Union has turned out to be more than loyal to the king. E.U.
Agricultural Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel recently asked the world not to
"overlook the elephant standing right in front of them.” This, we are
told, “is the huge increase in demand from emerging countries like China and
India. These countries are eating more meat. It takes about 8.8 pounds [four
kilos] of cereal to produce 2.2 pounds [1 kilo] of pork, and about 4.4 pounds
[2 kilos] of cereal to make 2.2 pounds [1 kilo] of poultry. So a dietary shift
toward meat in countries with populations of over a billion people has an
enormous impact on commodity markets.”
Apart from being
as ridiculous as the proverbial story of the blind man describing an elephant,
these comments are brazen admissions by the industrialized West that their
levels of prosperity are dependent on poverty and malnutrition in the
developing world. Having plundered for centuries by way of colonialism, they
now seek to continue to fatten themselves through a similar kind of plunder
during the current phase of imperialist globalization, the hallmark of which is
a sharp escalation of inequality.
But let us first consider the
facts. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the per-capita
consumption of grain in the United States is 2,300 pounds [1,046 kg] compared
to 392 pounds [178 kg] in India, in other words - five times more. The
per-capita consumption of poultry in the U.S. is 100 pounds [45.4 kg], in the
E.U. its 35 pounds [16.2 kg], while in India, its 4.1 pounds [1.9 kg]. So who's
eating more?
[The Hindu, India]
The fact that under
imperialist globalization, the vast majority of the world’s people continue to
remain undernourished is confirmed by the U.N. Food and Agriculture
Organization, which estimates that in 2001-03, there were 854 million
undernourished people worldwide. Of these, 820 million are in the developing world
and 25 million in the transition countries (former Soviet Union and Eastern
European countries). The World Food Summit held in Rome in 1996 had as its goal
cutting by half the number of undernourished people by 2015. Since 1990-92, the
baseline period for the Summit's target, the undernourished population in
developing countries declined by only 3 million. These are supposed to be years
of a "globalization offensive." This contrasts starkly with the
reduction of 37 million in the 1970s and 100 million in the 1980s. A decline of
26 million between 1992 and 1995-97 was followed by an increase of 23 million
leading up to 2001-03.
And given the sharp declines
in the global food stocks, this situation will only get worse. In 2008, wheat
stocks are forecast to come in at 142 million tones, down from 197 million in
2001 - the lowest level since 1982. Rice stocks for 2007 tumbled to 107 million
tonnes from a level of 136 million in 2001. Caving in to pressure from the
World Trade Organization, the IMF and the World Bank, poor countries dismantled
most tariffs and other trade barriers, enabling large agri-businesses and
subsidized goods from wealthy countries to undermine local agricultural
production. To some degree, food aid - in the form of subsidized dumped goods
produced in rich countries - also play a role in the decline of farming in poor
countries. Roughly 70 percent of all developing countries are now net importers
of food.
It's ironic that such
comments come when 78 percent of Indians still live on less than ˘47 [20
rupees] a day. According to official data, 136,324 farmers have committed
"distress suicide" between 1997 and 2005. The daily per-capita
consumption of cereal has declined from 468 grams in 1990-91 to 412 grams in
2005-06. The consumption of pulses, the main source of protein, declined from
42 grams (72 grams in 1956-57) to 33 grams during this period.
Even if we were to presume
that Indians are consuming more food, its impact on the global economy would
only be felt when Indian imports from global markets were significant. The fact
is that India’s share of total world imports is a mere one percent. Of this,
the import of agricultural products is a mere 11.7 percent of that total.
Therefore, Indian consumption patterns in no way contribute to the global food
crisis.
Fidel Castro warned a few
years ago that given the large-scale shift toward bio-fuels, a global food
grain crisis is imminent. Bush, however, defends this shift, anointing himself
“an ethanol person,” and stating, “I think it makes sense for America to be
growing energy. I’d much rather be paying our farmers when we go to the gas
pump than paying some nation that may not like us.”
Almost all of the growth in global
maize production is being diverted toward bio-fuels. The World Bank informs us
that the entirety of the production increases - 51 million tonnes between 2004
and 2005 - was absorbed by the U.S. alone for ethanol production. The E.U. has
declared that by 2010, nearly 6 percent of fuel should be bio-fuel. To fill up
an average tank with bio-fuel, the amount of maize required is equivalent to
its per-capita annual human consumption as a staple.
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
Three weeks ago when this
column observed that the central cause of the recent spurt in world food grain
prices was the frenzied hedge-fund speculation in the futures markets, many
dismissed it as predictable left-wing hyperbole. These critics would do well to
read, The Trading Frenzy that Sent Prices Soaring in the New Statesman 
.
The article relates that the
food crisis has developed over “an incredibly short space of time - essentially
over the past 18 months.” It continues: “The reason for food 'shortages' is
speculation in commodity futures following the collapse of the financial
derivatives markets. Desperate for quick returns, dealers are taking trillions
of dollars out of equities and mortgage bonds and plowing them into food and
raw materials. It’s called the ‘commodities super-cycle’ on Wall Street, and it
is likely to cause starvation on an epic scale ... Just like the boom in house
prices, commodity price inflation feeds on itself. The more prices rise, and
big profits are made, the more others invest, hoping for big returns. Look at
the financial Web sites: everyone and their mother is piling into commodities …
The trouble is that if you are one of the 2.8 billion people, almost half the
world’s population, who live on less than $2 a day, you may pay for these
profits with your life.”
So clearly, Bush and his E.U.
cheerleaders are diverting the world's attention from the real causes of the
global food crisis - the search and generation of super profits for
international finance capital, which is the prime driver of imperialist
globalization. India must protect itself from importing this kind of
speculation. At least now, the government must ban futures trading in essential
commodities and protect the aam admi [the common man] from greater
onslaughts of price rises.
SEE ALSO:
Hindustan Times, India
Indians Up In Arms
Over Bush Food Gaffe
Hindustan Times, India
Now
Bush Will Have
to Cope With Indian
Pet Food Demand! ...
The International Business Times, India
In Defense of Bush's
Gaffe on India and
Rising Food Prices
Times of India, India
Bush Bites Into Food Row;
Indians Foam at the Mouth
Financial Express, India
After all, It's the U.S.
Who 'Eats More' ...
[Posted by WORLDMEETS.US May 12, 9:58pm]
