How Obama and London Starve the World
May 4, 2012 • 10:26AM

OxFam America and other international food aid groups, yesterday held a media-briefing, to talk up support for Obama to adopt made-in-London agro-food policies at the Group of Eight Summit in Maryland May 18-19, the same policies now making way for famine. Praising Obama for his role three years ago in the food initiative at the G8 in L'Aquila, Italy, which expires this year, they spoke of "food security" being among the four top agenda items for Camp David, and that Obama can be expected to "take the lead" — read, grandstand for what London dictates. There is no hope for food supplies while Obama remains in office.

The key agriculture feature that Obama and this British echelon demand, is to "ensure a new push to encourage private sector investment in agriculture...," as stated by the ONE Campaign, whose director was on today's call. This has been part of Obama's announced "Feed the Future" drive for two years. Some 30 nations have agreed to submit their national agriculture plans to an international authority and "private sector" entities, to involve their farmers in producing for "the markets." Examples include poor Ethiopian women growing chick peas for Pepsi Co to process into humus. Obama's USAID facilitated Coca-Cola setting up a mango-for-export operation in Haiti, in 2011, in the midst of collapse. Wal-Mart is infamous for dictating slave-level horticulture-for-export in Central America. Monsanto is working on a disease-resistant cassava for Africa, including for cassava-ethanol, for poor people's cook stoves.

EIR raised the Haiti example to OxFam, ONE, and Save the Children, all in the Action AID coalition. Their spokesman denied knowing about the Haiti example. They said, some cases don't work out as well as others. EIR also raised the point of Obama's corn-for-biofuels policy. OxFam agreed that ethanol has gone too far.

Finally, EIR raised what is now on the U.S. agenda — NAWAPA, which was too much for the panel. Action Aid's spokesman said that this is "interesting," and there is a "range of views," but any public/private investment must have "local community involvement," and help "the poorest," implying that technology and infrastructure does harm.