With hunger fast engulfing the globe, the U.S. cannot withdraw from its role as the leader in facing this crisis which afflicts nearly 1 billion people, but that is just what is happening.
Right now the Congress is proposing significant budget cuts to the Food for Peace and other hunger-fighting programs. Why? Is it to cut the federal deficit? Hunger-fighting programs are relatively inexpensive and even ending them would not make a dent in the debt.
What cutting food aid will do is threaten millions of lives and devastate our own foreign policy goals of peace and stability. It will prevent any chance of maintaining a sustained attack on global hunger when it's needed more than ever. Here is what is at stake.
A severe drought has descended upon the Horn of Africa ruining food supplies. There are at least 9 million people who need food in Kenya, Somalia and Ethiopia.
Matt Croucher of Save the Children says, "Thousands of children could starve if we don't get life-saving help to them fast. Parents no longer have any way to feed their children; they've lost their animals, their wells have dried up and food is too expensive to afford." Save the Children has issued an emergency appeal for funds.
Food is needed to save lives and stop the powerful domino effect of hunger. Josette Sheeran, the World Food Programme's (WFP) director said last week, “It is essential that we move quickly to break the destructive cycle of drought and hunger that forces farmers to sell their means of production as part of their survival strategy."
A growing number of people in the Horn of Africa are in need of food assistance in the wake of a hard drought and ongoing conflict in Somalia. Photo: WFP/Caroline Bird
Article comments
1 - trol l
...and the assault on the hungry and poor goes on nationally in Orlando where Keith McHenry activist and egoist behind food-not-bombs and members of the group are jailed for violating a newly passed ordinance restricting the use of the commons for 'feedings'
2 - roger nowosielski
while the poor and the hungry serve as the political football in the current budget wars between our two major parties.
3 - Cindy
all very disturbing
4 - Baronius
William - You note that famine causes civil unrest. Doesn't the cause and effect work both ways, though? Haven't most modern famines been the result of civil wars? If so, then what in the world do we do? I'm not suggesting that we stop sending food. It just seems like sending food isn't enough.
5 - William Lambers
Yes, that is correct...In addition to food aid there must always be efforts at conflict resolution at every level.
The charity Catholic Relief Services, for instance, emphasizes this in their programs.
6 - Dr Dreadful
Baronius, you're right that it is a vicious circle. People will generally put up with an oppressive government as long as that government protects them and allows them access to food and shelter. The problem is that oppressive governments are also almost always corrupt, so the basic infrastructure breaks down, and that's what causes conflict. That in turn leads to further disruption of the food supply and the loss of shelter due to military actions and refugee migrations.
Law-abiding, prosperous societies tend to be less bellicose, because their people stand to lose more from war than they would gain. Clearly economic and political stability are the keys, but no-one seems to be able to agree which locks they fit.
7 - Baronius
I don't think there was famine in Somalia before the society broke down. Ditto Libya. Yemen, well, there's never been an ordered society there. I can think of one example - North Korea - where a society is currently facing famine without first facing civil war. Am I wrong on this?