<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The World Food Crisis and Agricultural Protectionism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2008/07/the-world-food-crisis-and-agricultural-protectionism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2008/07/the-world-food-crisis-and-agricultural-protectionism/</link>
	<description>Standing for Justice</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:34:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2008/07/the-world-food-crisis-and-agricultural-protectionism/#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=71#comment-51</guid>
		<description>Ropata,

I appreciate your thoughts. I would entirely agree that militias in many African nations and the destabilizing of healthy government is most certainly a factor contributing to many ills, especially in nations like Sudan, Congo, Somalia and of course, Zimbabwe. 

We won't talk about the effects of colonisation and foreign interests on regions like Sudan and how that history has fed into the current climate, because I think you make some valid points that I don't want to distract from.

These political problems you point out, with much violence being a chief symptom of the problems, most certainly have devastating effects on developing economies, but the correlation between trade agreements, the issuing of loans (and the clear stipulations to receive those loans) and the demise of agricultural industries in many developing nations is immense.

Rather than saying what I am pointing out sounds like a dubious conspiracy theory, I would say it points to two other perfectly reasonable things to consider:
1) Failed economic theory. Since issuing loans in the early days, the IMF and World Bank have adjusted their policies around requirements to obtain loans as the world has witnessed those requirements having a detrimental effect.
2) It is evidence that the nations that hold the most sway in the World Bank and IMF do what they feel they need to do to protect and benefit their own markets.

Your third point about organisations like the IMF having goals to enable nations to build economic independence is a good one, but it's not unreasonable to think that some of what was implemented to see that happen has, in the long term, had a detrimental effect on those goals - now being evidenced in the food markets of the world.

We are in agreement that people like Robert Mugabe stifle any progress though and for this reason, organisations like the African Union need to step up and do their utmost to remove him from power.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ropata,</p>
<p>I appreciate your thoughts. I would entirely agree that militias in many African nations and the destabilizing of healthy government is most certainly a factor contributing to many ills, especially in nations like Sudan, Congo, Somalia and of course, Zimbabwe. </p>
<p>We won&#8217;t talk about the effects of colonisation and foreign interests on regions like Sudan and how that history has fed into the current climate, because I think you make some valid points that I don&#8217;t want to distract from.</p>
<p>These political problems you point out, with much violence being a chief symptom of the problems, most certainly have devastating effects on developing economies, but the correlation between trade agreements, the issuing of loans (and the clear stipulations to receive those loans) and the demise of agricultural industries in many developing nations is immense.</p>
<p>Rather than saying what I am pointing out sounds like a dubious conspiracy theory, I would say it points to two other perfectly reasonable things to consider:<br />
1) Failed economic theory. Since issuing loans in the early days, the IMF and World Bank have adjusted their policies around requirements to obtain loans as the world has witnessed those requirements having a detrimental effect.<br />
2) It is evidence that the nations that hold the most sway in the World Bank and IMF do what they feel they need to do to protect and benefit their own markets.</p>
<p>Your third point about organisations like the IMF having goals to enable nations to build economic independence is a good one, but it&#8217;s not unreasonable to think that some of what was implemented to see that happen has, in the long term, had a detrimental effect on those goals - now being evidenced in the food markets of the world.</p>
<p>We are in agreement that people like Robert Mugabe stifle any progress though and for this reason, organisations like the African Union need to step up and do their utmost to remove him from power.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ropata</title>
		<link>http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2008/07/the-world-food-crisis-and-agricultural-protectionism/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>ropata</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:29:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=71#comment-50</guid>
		<description>So your argument is that
a) developed nations dumped subsidized food stocks on the 3rd world (using IMF for leverage)
b) this destroyed local agriculture
c) there is now a shortage due to biofuels 
d) subsequent global food prices have led to widespread starvation
Correct? Sounds feasible except
 ~ first world cannot be blamed for all ills: many African nations are infested with roving militias and tribal feuds that wreck their economies
 ~ your claims about the IMF/World bank sound like a dubious conspiracy theory
 ~ the UN and other entities like the IMF have explicit goals to enable nations to build economic independence, but destructive regimes like Mugabe's Zimbabwe are stifling such efforts

Aside: I would be interested in learning how Uganda has managed to improve their situation recently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So your argument is that<br />
a) developed nations dumped subsidized food stocks on the 3rd world (using IMF for leverage)<br />
b) this destroyed local agriculture<br />
c) there is now a shortage due to biofuels<br />
d) subsequent global food prices have led to widespread starvation<br />
Correct? Sounds feasible except<br />
 ~ first world cannot be blamed for all ills: many African nations are infested with roving militias and tribal feuds that wreck their economies<br />
 ~ your claims about the IMF/World bank sound like a dubious conspiracy theory<br />
 ~ the UN and other entities like the IMF have explicit goals to enable nations to build economic independence, but destructive regimes like Mugabe&#8217;s Zimbabwe are stifling such efforts</p>
<p>Aside: I would be interested in learning how Uganda has managed to improve their situation recently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
