Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Environment

It's Pretty Clear That Europe Is Using 'Trade' Deals to Steal Food from Poor Countries

By George Monbiot, Monbiot.com. Posted August 28, 2008.


A new wave of food colonialism is taking food from the mouths of the poor.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

In his book Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis tells the story of the famines that sucked the guts out of India in the 1870s. The hunger began when a drought, caused by El Nino, killed the crops on the Deccan plateau. As starvation bit, the viceroy, Lord Lytton, oversaw the export to England of a record 6.4 million hundredweight of wheat. While Lytton lived in imperial splendour and commissioned, among other extravangances, "the most colossal and expensive meal in world history between 12 and 29 million people died. Only Stalin manufactured a comparable hunger.

Now a new Lord Lytton is seeking to engineer another brutal food grab. As Tony Blair's favoured courtier, Peter Mandelson often created the impression that he would do anything to please his master. Today he is the European trade commissioner. From his sumptuous offices in Brussels and Strasbourg, he hopes to impose a treaty which will permit Europe to snatch food from the mouths of some of the world's poorest people.

Seventy per cent of the protein eaten by the people of Senegal comes from fish. Traditionally cheaper than other animal products, it sustains a population which ranks close to the bottom of the human development index. One in six of the working population is employed in the fishing industry; some two-thirds of these workers are women. Over the past three decades, their means of subsistence has started to collapse as other nations have plundered Senegal's stocks.

The European Union has two big fish problems. One is that, partly as a result of its failure to manage them properly, its own fisheries can no longer meet European demand. The other is that its governments won't confront their fishing lobbies and decommission all the surplus boats. The EU has tried to solve both problems by sending its fishermen to West Africa. Since 1979 it has struck agreements with the government of Senegal, granting our fleets access to its waters. As a result, Senegal's marine ecosystem has started to go the same way as ours. Between 1994 and 2005, the weight of fish taken from the country's waters fell from 95,000 tons to 45,000 tons. Muscled out by European trawlers, the indigenous fishery is crumpling: the number of boats run by local people has fallen by 48 percent since 1997.

In a recent report on this pillage, ActionAid shows that fishing families which once ate three times a day are now eating only once or twice. As the price of fish rises, their customers also go hungry. The same thing has happened in all the west African countries with which the EU has maintained fisheries agreements. In return for wretched amounts of foreign exchange, their primary source of protein has been looted.

The government of Senegal knows this, and in 2006 it refused to renew its fishing agreement with the EU. But European fishermen -- mostly from Spain and France -- have found ways round the ban. They have been registering their boats as Senegalese, buying up quotas from local fishermen and transferring catches at sea from local boats. These practices mean that they can continue to take the country's fish, and have no obligation to land them in Senegal. Their profits are kept on ice until the catch arrives in Europe.

Mandelson's office is trying to negotiate economic partnership agreements with African countries. They were supposed to have been concluded by the end of last year, but many countries, including Senegal, have refused to sign. The agreements insist that European companies have the right both to establish themselves freely on African soil, and to receive national treatment. This means that the host country is not allowed to discriminate between its own businesses and European companies. Senegal would be forbidden to ensure that its fish are used to sustain its own industry and to feed its own people. The dodges used by European trawlers would be legalised.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: food, fish, famine, food scarcity

George Monbiot is the author Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning. Read more of his writings at Monbiot.com. This article originally appeared in the Guardian.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Holy Crap
Posted by: theVRWCwhodatesLiberals on Aug 30, 2008 1:21 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I fought it was only Bush/Cheney, America in general and Hallaburtons fault for something like this and Barack was going to slap our hands and fix it all... Thank You AlterNet for this article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» sad Posted by: theVRWCwhodatesLiberals
As You So Eloquently Noted ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Aug 30, 2008 1:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These agreements not only take the food but collapse the economies of these countries and why there has been such an increase in illegal migration across the Mediterranean to the EU and to the Canary Islands, a Spanish holding.

Yes, the United States is not the only Imperialist, just the clumsiest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: As You So Eloquently Noted ... Posted by: CosmoViking
» RE: As You So Eloquently Noted ... Posted by: leTerrassier
syed salamah ali mahdi
Posted by: salamah on Aug 30, 2008 5:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was born in Patna, the capital of the State/ Province of Bihar. Right by the side of the Jesuit School I attended from 1950 to 1960 is a monumental igloo type grain silo called the GOL GHAR meaning the Round House. This was built by the Brits at the time of another horrendous famine in the Nineteenth Century, called the Bihar Famine. While upto 3 million were starving to death, the Brits were collecting their Imperial Tax in rice, wheat, corn and millets, stocking them in the Gol Ghar and shipping them out to Great Britain through Calcutta! The Brits are TODAY complaining about the Indians, the Bengalis and the Pakistanis creating food shortages in UK by their very presence in UK!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: syed salamah ali mahdi Posted by: richholland
Europe Has Been Robbing The Starving of Africa of Food For Considerably Longer Than America
Posted by: opmoc on Aug 30, 2008 5:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yet only occasionally do we get to hear from the likes of this article the extent to which it is still going on.

To get a flavour of the complete environmental devastastation, starvartion and slavery that Europeans have inflicted on some of the poorest people in the World in Africa....

Check out this

http://www.darwinsnightmare.com/

If you are not an environmentalist after watching this film then you are sick.

Trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeIVCzGykB8&

Extract of comment on film

""Darwin's Nightmare" presents as the agonized human face of globalization. While the flesh of millions of Nile perch is stripped, cleaned and flash-frozen for export to wealthy countries, millions of people in the Tanzanian interior live on the brink of famine. Some of them will eat fried fish heads, which are processed in vast open-air pits infested with maggots and scavenging birds. Along the shores of the lake, homeless children fight over scraps of food and get high from the fumes of melting plastic-foam containers used to pack the fish. In the encampments where the fishermen live, AIDS is rampant and the afflicted walk back to their villages to die.

The Nile perch itself haunts the film's infernal landscape like a monstrous metaphor. An alien species introduced into Lake Victoria sometime in the 1960's, it has devoured every other kind of fish in the lake, even feeding on its own young as it grows to almost grotesque dimensions, and destroying an ancient and diverse ecosystem. To some, its prevalence is a boon, since the perch provides an exportable resource that has brought development money from the World Bank and the European Union. The survival of nearly everyone in the film is connected to the fish: the prostitutes who keep company with the pilots in the hotel bars; the displaced farmers who handle the rotting carcasses; the night watchman, armed with a bow and a few poison-tipped arrows, who guards a fish-related research institute. He is paid $1 a day and found the job after his predecessor was murdered.

Filming with a skeleton crew - basically himself and another camera operator - Mr. Sauper has produced an extraordinary work of visual journalism, a richly illustrated report on a distant catastrophe that is also one of the central stories of our time. Rather than use voice-over or talking-head expert interviews, he allows the dimensions of the story to emerge through one-on-one conversation and acutely observed visual detail."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Great film - Posted by: fearn
» RE: Great film - Posted by: PopRox80
» Great film but Posted by: daw13
Europe
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Aug 30, 2008 8:33 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I dunno about that. I just dont see Europe doing that. It just does not make sense.

Whistler
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: urope Posted by: barbjci
» RE: urope Posted by: Harris20
boycott african fish
Posted by: logic on Aug 30, 2008 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can change our demands to modify our intake because we are a problem internationally in this fashion. We need more alerts such as this article, on conditions of our international trading. Environmental impact on locals we trade with could be front page news if we ask. I'm pretty sure that if these conditions were known to the population of France, that there would be a national boycott on "offensive product import". I get pretty sick of hearing what Obama ate this morning and whether McCain passed wind. A weekly update would be fine with daily reports on life and business at home and abroad. Everytime the media starts showing too much of one thing, I immediately wonder what they're deliberately not covering. This type of article needs to be a daily.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporatism
Posted by: setterwoman on Aug 30, 2008 1:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever since my rapid education since 9/11, I've discovered that it's not just the U.S., though the U.S. is probably the biggest culprit. It's not nations anymore, it's corporations with the governments of various countries at their beck and call. Global fascism.

Will the people of the world learn to work together to stop this madness? Can the people of the world stop worshiping wealth? And how can the people work together to take down these corporate powers and governments?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Corporatism Posted by: luzmejor
Trade Reform Is a Global Issue
Posted by: GPFrank on Aug 30, 2008 8:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The AlterNet article on EU taking food out of the mouths of the poor is a wake up call on the necessity of global reform on trade policies.
Would the Obama presidency be capable of making the U.S. once more a leader, in taking these issues to the United Nations or encouraging the African nations to do so? Of course we have to go back and change our own NAFTA first.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the politics of vegetarianism (part 1)
Posted by: vasumurti on Aug 30, 2008 9:58 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Global hunger could be directly attributed to meat-eating." ---Chrissie Hynde

Half the world's population does not receive an adequate amount of food to eat. Ten to twenty million die annually of hunger and its effects. The Institute for Food and Development Policy reports that, "Forty thousand children starve to death on this planet every day," or one child every two seconds.

The livestock population of the United States today consumes enough grain and soybeans to feed over five times the entire human population of the country. We feed these animals over 80% of the corn we grow, and over 95% of the oats. Less than half the harvested agricultural acreage in the United States is used to grow food for people. Most of it is used to grow livestock feed.

Ronald J. Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action, in his 1977 book, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, pointed out that 220 million Americans were eating enough food (largely because of the high consumption of grain-fed livestock) to feed over one billion people in the poorer countries.

The world's cattle alone, not to mention pigs and chickens, consume a quantity of food equal to the caloric needs of 8.7 billion people. It takes 16 pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef. According to Department of Agriculture statistics, one acre of land can grow 20,000 pounds of potatoes. That same acre of land, if used to grow cattlefeed, can produce less than 165 pounds of beef.

In his book, The Hungry Planet, Georg Bergstrom points out that protein-starved underdeveloped nations export more protein to wealthy nations than they receive. He calls this "the protein swindle." Ninety percent of the world's fish meal catch, for example, is exported to rich countries. One-third of Africa's peanut crop winds up in the stomachs of European livestock. Half the world's cereal crop is fed to livestock and the United States annually imports one million tons of vegetable protein from Third World nations--just to feed its farm animals.

Bergstrom writes: "Sometimes one wonders how many Americans and Western Europeans have grasped the fact that quite a few of their beef steaks, quarts of milk, dozens of eggs, and hundreds of broilers are the result, not of their agriculture, but of the approximately two million metric tons of protein, mostly of high quality, which astute Western businessmen channel away from the needy and hungry."

Jeremy Rifkin, author of a dozen influential books and President of the Foundation on Economic Trends, writes in his 1992 bestseller Beyond Beef:

"Cattle and other livestock are devouring much of the grain produced on the planet. It need be emphasized that this is a new phenomenon, unlike anything ever experienced before.

"Contrary to popular belief, the poor are getting poorer each year...Increased poverty has meant increased malnutrition. On the African continent, nearly one in every four human beings is malnourished. In Latin America, nearly one out of every seven people goes to bed hungry each night. In Asia and the Pacific, 28 percent of the people border on starvation, experiencing the gnawing pain of a perpetual hunger."

"In the Near East, one in ten people is underfed. Chronic hunger now affects upwards of 1.3 billion people, according to the world Health Organization--a statistic all the more striking in a world where one third of all the grain produced is being fed to cattle and other livestock. Never before in human history has such a large percentage of our species--nearly 25 percent--been malnourished.

"The transition of world agriculture from food grain to feed grains represents an...evil whose consequences may be far greater and longer lasting than any past examples of violence inflicted by men against their fellow human beings."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the politics of vegetarianism (part 2)
Posted by: vasumurti on Aug 30, 2008 10:04 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the 1970s, the UN Secretary General said that the food consumption of the rich countries is the key cause of hunger around the world. The United Nations has recommended that the wealthy nations cut down on their meat consumption.

The Worldwatch Institute has released a report entitled Taking Stock: Animal Farming and the Environment, which lists nation after nation where food deprivation follows the switch from a grain-based diet to a meat-based one.

Most of the nations that now import grain from the United States were once self-sufficient in grain. The main reason they aren't is the rise in meat production and consumption.

In Taiwan, for example, per capita consumption of meat and eggs increased 600 percent from 1950 to 1990. With this change, vastly increased amounts of grain have gone to livestock, raising the annual per capita grain use in the country from 375 pounds to 858 pounds. In 1950, Taiwan was a grain exporter; in 1990 the nation imported, mostly for feed, 74 percent of the grain it used.

In mainland China, the situation is similar. Increased meat consumption has meant less grain available to feed people. Since 1978, meat consumption has more than doubled, to twenty-four kilograms. The share of Chinese grain fed to livestock rose from 7 percent in 1960 to 20 percent in 1990.

Over half Of Latin America's beef production is exported, and the rest is too expensive for any but the wealthy to purchase. From 1960 to 1980 beef exports from El Salvador increases over sixfold. Meanwhile, increasing numbers of small farmers lost their livelihood and were pushed off their land. Today, 72 percent of all Salvadoran infants are underfed.

In Brazil, major portions of the Amazon tropical rain forests have been destroyed so that wealthy multinational corporations can produce beef for the wealthy. Corporations such as Volkswagen, Nestle, Mitsubishi, Liquigas, King Ranch, and Swift-Eckrich have bulldozed and burned literally hundreds of millions of acres, replacing the world's oldest and richest ecosystems, home to two million or more species of plant and animal life with a single crop--pasture grass for cattle. And here, the beef produced has not gone to feed hungry Brazilians; it has been primarily exported to Western Europe, the Middle East, and North America. In 1987, the United States imported three hundred million pounds of meat from countries in Central and South America.

With the help of international lending institutions, Brazil has mounted an enormous effort to increase agricultural production, but this has been primarily meat-oriented production and for export. In the late '60s, soybeans were almost nonexistent or Brazil. Today, this crop is the nation's number one export--but almost all of it goes to feed Japanese and European livestock. Twenty five years ago, one third of the Brazilian population suffered from malnutrition. Today, the figure has risen to two thirds.

Oxfam, the international charity, reports that in Brazil huge cattle ranches take up some of the most fertile soil in the whole country, yet 60 percent of Brazilians are malnourished. Oxfam estimates that in Mexico, 80 percent of the children in rural areas are undernourished, yet the livestock are fed more grain than the human population eats! The livestock are exported of course, to satisfy the developed nations' craving for cheap hamburgers.

In the early '60s, sorghum was almost unknown in Mexico. By 1980, it covered literally twice the acreage of wheat. Sorghum isn't grown for humans. It is fed to livestock. In the late '60s, livestock consumed only 6 percent of Mexico's grain. Today, the figure is over 50 percent. This is a trend throughout the Third World. Copying the United States' meat-oriented diet, these poor countries devote increasing amounts of their resources to meat production.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the politics of vegetarianism (part 3)
Posted by: vasumurti on Aug 30, 2008 10:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Guatemala, 75 percent of the children under five years of age are undernourished. Yet, every year Guatemala exports 40 million pounds of meat to the United States. It borders on the criminal!

In Costa Rica, beef production quadrupled between 1960 and 1980, but almost all this beef is exported to the United States, and what does stay in the country is eaten by a tiny minority. Though more and more Costa Rican land is being turned over to meat production, the population is not eating more meat for the change. The average family in Costa Rica eats less meat than the average American housecat.

Throughout Latin America, land availability is a prominent social issue. Revolutionaries as well as reform-minded moderates have made land reform a major issue. Yet in many Latin American countries, forests are being leveled in order to create pastures for cattle grazing land.

In a region where land availability is a central social issue, existing land is being gobbled up by livestock agriculture. The resulting social tensions have resulted in civil wars, repression and violence.

Hunger is really a social disease caused by the unjust, inefficient and wasteful control of food. Our food security is not being threatened by the prolific, hungry masses, but by elites that profit by the concentration and internationalization of control of food resources.

In country after country the pattern is repeated. Livestock industries are consuming feed to such an extent that now almost all Third World nations must import grain. Seventy-five percent of Third World imports of corn, barley, sorghum, and oats are fed to animals, not to people. In country after country, the demand for meat among the rich is squeezing out staple production for the poor.

The same trend can be found in the Middle East and North Africa--increases in grain-fed livestock require more imported feed. In the early '70s, Egypt was self-sufficient in grain. Then, livestock ate only 10 percent of the nation's grain. Today, livestock consume 36 percent of Egypt's grain. As a result, Egypt must now import eight million tons of grain every year.

In the late '60s , Syria was a barley exporter. But in the intervening years, livestock has consumed increasing amounts of the country's grain. Now, despite a phenomenal 1,000 percent increase in the land area devoted to producing barley, Syria must import the cereal.

According to Buckminster Fuller, there are enough resources at present to feed, clothe, house and educate every human being on the planet at American middle class standards. The Institute for Food and Development Policy has shown that there is no country in the world in which the people cannot feed themselves from their own resources.

Moreover, there is no correlation between land density and hunger. China has twice as many people per cultivated acre as India, yet less of a hunger problem. Bangladesh has just one-half the people per cultivated acre that Taiwan has, yet Taiwan has no starvation, while Bangladesh has one of the highest rates in the world. The most densely populated countries in the world today are not India and Bangladesh, but Holland and Japan.

Many of us believe that hunger exists because there's not enough food to go around. But as Frances Moore Lappe' and her anti-hunger organization Food First! have shown, the real cause of hunger is a scarcity of justice, not a scarcity of food.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

small potatoes
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Aug 31, 2008 9:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it's just going to get much, much worse...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GRAMMAR CORRECTION NEEDED IN ARTICLE:
Posted by: maribelle on Aug 31, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quote:

While Lytton lived in imperial splendour and commissioned, among other extravangances, "the most colossal and expensive meal in world history between 12 and 29 million people died.

end quote.

1. Where does the quotation mark close?
2. Last sentence is not grammatically correct. Can you please fix it? Thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not the population that's to blame. The Entire West is controlled by elites.
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 31, 2008 12:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks George for finally coming clean. The good side of the West has been silenced by the dark and evil side. Ironically, the fundies in the Mideast and East have only gotten stronger while the working class there have been further marginalized. Never let a Malthusian get away with blaming population numbers as they misuse that data to hide the fact that the "free" trade scams are doing the real damage. Take away the "free" trade scams and it will be evident that it's not the population that is to blame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

this is one way the English starved the irish to death.
Posted by: avatar_singh on Aug 31, 2008 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
while tyhere was already a crisis in the Irish countryside and the english govt was repeteadly todl about t=it-there was standing on th Dublin Harbour 3 ships loaded with grain from India(all stolen ofcourse from Indians). but that shipment was allowed to stay (and not unloeaded) till many millions dies -only then that shipment ( which was destined for ther anyway) was unloaded.
the english practice genocide through mass starvation(so called population control) through media alies about population, through creating chaos in other countries and then installing thier stooges like one bastard manmohan singh of India, and then siphoining off the target counries wealth through thos eunlelctable stooges who have been put in the power. ]in other word isntall yletsin everywhere and loot the country to enrich London and england.
that is th emodus operandi of this bastard race.and they msut be eliminated to save the world.

IT IS THE war between english and anglosaxon versues the rest of humanity -a real race war and nothing else.
so forget west-itidoes not exist except as code word for anglosaxon race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]