Biofuel plantations should make way for more agro output
Mohammad Ali Sattar | Monday, 28 July 2008
SELDOM does the top boss of the UN speak out so loudly especially for rousing awareness amongst the member countries. The Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki moon came out very strongly in warning the leading economies of world about the impending food crisis and the accompanying dangers ahead, while stressing the case for urgency. He made a very good point when he pointed out the importance of biofuels to combat climate change but he also stressed the need for maintaining adequate agriculture production to prevent large masses from sliding into absolute hunger. As things stand now, a good many countries will have to do a lot of thinking about reducing biofuel plantations to make way for more agro output.
If we look back a little, the League of Nations and subsequently the United Nations were the outcome of political exercise. The basic need for a world body to settle disputes and contain conflicts was felt acutely after two great wars. The body gradually opened itself up to address the economic issues. But until now it remained more occupied with dealing the political matters more than anything. Rather, the UN should have been more focused on the global economy that would have helped its cause of 'policy of containment'.
Few could think that this is the type of problem the UN is capable of handling more effectively than geo-political complexities with which its secretariat remains stuck. It should be given more options and opportunities to work and plan on massive economic rescue plans. We know of economic bail-out plans of different countries at different times. But the UN needs to do a lot more than its present activities.
We have more 'economic genius' than the 'war talents'. Very few people can strategize war , this is why they bring about colossal damage to lives and properties; but many can work successfully to grow crops and provide food to the hungry. It is time the member-countries change their stance and make the world body a truly 'economic body'.
It is indeed heartening to note that the Secretary General has spoken out about such an imperative. He has raised concern about the global economy. He has noted that the gravity of the crisis should be realised soonest. If he has felt that the war and invasions by the powerful cannot be stopped, he is right. The unilateral actions of the superpower have virtually paralysed the UN. He may have also felt that the office of the Secretary General should show signs of morality and focus on other economic priorities.
Ban ki Moon feels the signs of poverty and famine that will lead to unprecedented hunger and the issues thereof need to be addressed right now, instead of less important 'biofuel issues or climate change'.
In a way, he is right. The climate change and the alternative energy issues will be on the cards as regular tasks. Necessity will lead the human race to find alternatives to survive. But in order to survive we also need food (that's the first need and priority) and in our quest for alternative energy, we should not endanger our crops. This is simple and the simplest things are mostly forgotten. If the greatest care is not taken, mass hunger may well envelope the earth -- a problem, if real, definitely calls for unity of all nations in response.
Have we realised that already food inflation is having effects far beyond people's breadbaskets? The people are fighting economic hardship by embracing social ills. As to the immediate necessary step, all parties are more or less of the same opinion. Rapid increase in global agriculture output has to be taken up on a war footing.
A number of countries are experiencing food riots on a scale not seen in centuries. More political chaos will follow if more mouths go hungry. This should open our eyes wide. What we need is: the developed economies should change their priorities and make huge investments in the food sector. The production should be increased and steps should be taken to transport those to feed the hungry in places of crises. Without immediate response from the heavyweights, it will be a very tough situation to handle. We should put all our efforts to avoid a landscape of death and starvation and desecrate the land of God.
If we look back a little, the League of Nations and subsequently the United Nations were the outcome of political exercise. The basic need for a world body to settle disputes and contain conflicts was felt acutely after two great wars. The body gradually opened itself up to address the economic issues. But until now it remained more occupied with dealing the political matters more than anything. Rather, the UN should have been more focused on the global economy that would have helped its cause of 'policy of containment'.
Few could think that this is the type of problem the UN is capable of handling more effectively than geo-political complexities with which its secretariat remains stuck. It should be given more options and opportunities to work and plan on massive economic rescue plans. We know of economic bail-out plans of different countries at different times. But the UN needs to do a lot more than its present activities.
We have more 'economic genius' than the 'war talents'. Very few people can strategize war , this is why they bring about colossal damage to lives and properties; but many can work successfully to grow crops and provide food to the hungry. It is time the member-countries change their stance and make the world body a truly 'economic body'.
It is indeed heartening to note that the Secretary General has spoken out about such an imperative. He has raised concern about the global economy. He has noted that the gravity of the crisis should be realised soonest. If he has felt that the war and invasions by the powerful cannot be stopped, he is right. The unilateral actions of the superpower have virtually paralysed the UN. He may have also felt that the office of the Secretary General should show signs of morality and focus on other economic priorities.
Ban ki Moon feels the signs of poverty and famine that will lead to unprecedented hunger and the issues thereof need to be addressed right now, instead of less important 'biofuel issues or climate change'.
In a way, he is right. The climate change and the alternative energy issues will be on the cards as regular tasks. Necessity will lead the human race to find alternatives to survive. But in order to survive we also need food (that's the first need and priority) and in our quest for alternative energy, we should not endanger our crops. This is simple and the simplest things are mostly forgotten. If the greatest care is not taken, mass hunger may well envelope the earth -- a problem, if real, definitely calls for unity of all nations in response.
Have we realised that already food inflation is having effects far beyond people's breadbaskets? The people are fighting economic hardship by embracing social ills. As to the immediate necessary step, all parties are more or less of the same opinion. Rapid increase in global agriculture output has to be taken up on a war footing.
A number of countries are experiencing food riots on a scale not seen in centuries. More political chaos will follow if more mouths go hungry. This should open our eyes wide. What we need is: the developed economies should change their priorities and make huge investments in the food sector. The production should be increased and steps should be taken to transport those to feed the hungry in places of crises. Without immediate response from the heavyweights, it will be a very tough situation to handle. We should put all our efforts to avoid a landscape of death and starvation and desecrate the land of God.