Sunday, 31 March 2013

KEY ISSUES IN THE GMO DEBATE: 1. FOOD AS A WEAPON

KEY ISSUES IN THE GMO DEBATE: 1. FOOD AS A WEAPON

 
The New Food Wars: Globalization GMOs and Biofuels
Uploaded on 3 Jul 2008

Across the world, food riots are taking place. Scientist and activist Vandana Shiva explores whether the future will be one of food wars or food peace. She argues that the creation of food peace demands a major shift in the way food is produced and distributed, and the way in which we manage and use the soil, water and biodiversity, which makes food production possible. 17th Annual Margolis lecture at UC Irvine. http://youtu.be/Iq6jpkDNxtI

 
“For centuries, Europeans dominated the African continent. The white man arrogated to himself the right to rule and to be obeyed by the non-white; his mission, he claimed, was to "civilise" Africa. Under this cloak, the Europeans robbed the continent of vast riches and inflicted unimaginable suffering on the African people...
Although most Africans are poor, our continent is potentially extremely rich. Our mineral resources, which are being exploited with foreign capital only to enrich foreign investors, range from gold and diamonds to uranium and petroleum. Our forests contain some of the finest woods to be grown anywhere. Our cash crops include cocoa, coffee, rubber, tobacco and cotton... This is one of the reasons why we have in Africa the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty, and scarcity in the midst of abundance.”
- Kwame Nkrumah 1961,
Source: I Speak of Freedom: A Statement of African Ideology (London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1961), pp. Xi-xiv. Transcribed: Internet Modern History Sourcebook, Transcription Edit/HTML: Mike B. http://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/nkrumah/1961/speak-freedom.htm

1. “Food Is A Weapon”

corn_grenade

Food is a weapon. - Earl Butz, 1974, the United States Secretary of Agriculture

To borrow from Napoleon, quoted as saying, "An army marches on its stomach," it should be easier to understand that a nation also "marches" on its stomach. If the British had had absolute control over our food, we could probably still be a British colony even today. It would have certainly been a formidable task, even under the great leadership of Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. Just as "procuring enough food to support an army in the field is a paramount concern for all commanders. Although weapons, clothing, and shelter are of the greatest immediate importance to soldiers, logistical support to provide food and material is often the decisive element in winning wars", so in the same way our survival as a sovereign nation depend upon our own abilities to feed ourselves.

The focus of this segment is to take a look at the implications of seed patents, disappearance of natural seeds, and the monopoly of food by giant multinational corporations. Fortunately, if we are to learn from our own history, we would not require a genius to point out the extreme dangers associated with having foreign multinational corporations in control of whether we live or we die. Our history over the period of the past 500 years has been a history about foreign domination. A people with a history of slavery and colonialism must not find it too hard to understand the new forms of bondage that are being surreptitiously introduced into our lives, without any discussion or consent from us.

The new chains creeping in are being designed and reinforced with materials difficult to break, and much more effective than the metal shackles, plus all the military accoutrements associated with slavery, gin, gun powder, cannon balls and all! This is what the topic of food as a weapon is about. It is about the use of food to control a targeted population, or country. The drive to replace natural food with genetically modified foods is gathering steam, and we need to know and understand that we should take our history of slavery and colonialism seriously because the use of food as a weapon surpasses all chains.

It is a widely known fact that hungry people will do anything in order to get food. Whoever is able to control the access to the food of the people, controls the people. Anthony Gucciardi puts it nicely in How food is being used as a weapon, when he writes: “When people begin to starve instinctive primal triggers lead to a desire to do absolutely anything for food. Those with food, whether it is the government or a nearby family, will have complete power over others. Food could essentially be used as a weapon, thousands of times more powerful than money or most any other resource. But even in current times, food is used as a weapon by those in power through the use of government regulations and chemical additives that destroy both your health and your bank account. Artificial inflation and speculation, toxic substances hidden in the food, and government regulations are but a few examples. But where did the idea of using food as a supremely powerful weapon begin?” [1] 

Of course, throughout history, examples are replete with the use of food as a weapon of war. "Sieges of fortified positions have been used since time immemorial to starve, demoralize, and physically weaken the ensconced combatants. Pictorial representations in Egypt depict sieges over 4,000 years ago, while the Iliad of Homer describes the siege of Troy by the Greeks over 3,000 years ago. It, like many of the numerous sieges that followed, ended not through force of arms, but through deception and treachery." [2]

The current sanctions against Iran could have been far more devastating and effective if Monsanto had a monopoly over the seeds in that country.

In surrendering our natural and fundamental rights to seeds to multinational corporations, we surrender our very sovereignty to them. The real challenge facing our generation today is whether we would be born as free and die as slaves. The power of the patent on life has put a veritable instrument in the hands of those who wish to dominate and control access to food, unprecedented in history. Anthony Gucciardi answers his own question in the article quoted above, he explains that, in 1974, the idea of using food as a weapon was introduced in a 200-page report (http://wlym.com/text/NSSM200.htm) by US politician and former Secretary of State, Dr. Henry Kissinger. The report, entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, stated that food aid would be withheld from developing countries in need until they submitted to birth control policies that would effectively sterilize large numbers of the population to curb growth.” [3]

In this document, Dr. Kissinger writes:

"There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID [U.S. Agency for International Development] and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion." [4]

The transition from the use of “food aid” as a tool in international diplomacy to “food monopoly” as a weapon of control has only been made possible through the patents on life-forms. Where powerful nations with a history and appetite for domination, who "oppose the right to water and sanitation as a fundamental human right," begin all of a sudden, a campaign to assure our "food security and nutrition", while millions of their own citizens, particularly, African-Americans, who are worst hit by the on-going economic downturn, go hungry on a daily basis, we need to take that with a pinch of salt, if not smell a rat!

US Using Kissinger "Food As a Weapon" Plan to Starve North Korea


Published on 29 Mar 2012
The US has suspended food aid to North Korea after the country refused to cancel a scheduled rocket launch. Washington says this breaks the deal in which North Korea agreed to suspend its uranium enrichment program and nuclear missile tests in exchange for humanitarian support. Pyongyang says the launch is merely intended to send a satellite into space.For more, lets' talk to James Corbett, editor of The Corbett Report, who joins us from Osaka, Japan. http://youtu.be/8Ijpk6_Dt-c


The problem is that, "With little economic prowess and a nation in peril, developing countries would be forced to comply or face continued famine and death. Food was the weapon, and it was being held captive as a means of foreign policy and warfare. Holding onto valuable food aid and allowing innocent villagers to starve is not much different than waging open physical warfare upon them, which would be prohibited by international law and frowned upon by the majority of citizens worldwide. Henry Kissinger's report is but one incident of food weaponry, however. There are a number of other ways in which food is used as a daily weapon against the public." [5]

In her thesis, "Edible Armaments: Food as a Weapon in the Cold War and Culture," Meghan O’Dea eloquently observes, “What the world eats and why is as much a part of decades-old politics as the alliances, trade agreements, and military conflicts in which governments are entangled today.” [6]

We live in a world where the power of the patent on life-forms have reached the absurd. The Automatic Earth, Tuesday, February 26, 2013, an opinion, "Time To Stop Monsanto And The US Supreme Court", which opened with, "The US Supreme Court heard a case on February 19 that is interesting perhaps not even so much because of the topic at hand but more because of the level of absurdity involved. It feels like we warpsped our way into a parallel universe where the laws of nature are entirely different from those on earth.

That is to say, the court should never have been in a position to hear the case, but it has created the legal space for itself, aided and abetted by Congress and the US patent system, to hear it anyway. Because of this we should all ask ourselves: How on earth have we ever allowed things to get this far? What were we thinking, and what were we not, because we were busy doing other things? And finally: how do we get out of this parallel universe and into our own?" [7]
 
This may be coming soon to a court near you! For those unfamiliar with the case, it involved a so-called "patent infringement" in which a large AgriBusiness multinational corporation, Monsanto, sued Indiana farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman. "It is one of a large number, 142, patent infringement suits against 410 farmers and 56 small businesses in the US. Monsanto alleges that Mr. Bowman has infringed on one of its patents, the Roundup Ready soybean, by buying cheap(er) "excess" soybeans from a local grain elevator for a late-season planting, which, first, allowed him not to pay the company the full price for its patented seeds, and second, runs counter to its demand that farmers buy new seeds for every planting instead of saving seeds from the previous harvest." [8]  

There are suspicions that this charade of a case, if a carefully orchestrated attempt to affirm the rights of multinational corporations over farmers who would naturally like to continue the practice of saving their seeds for re-planting, or cutting the corners and not paying royalties. It the appears the observation of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. who was reported to have asked: "Why in the world,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked, “would anybody spend any money to try to improve the seed if as soon as they sold the first one anybody could grow more and have as many of those seeds as they want?" [9]

As they continue to fine-tune the legal and political framework of control, it is about time we take a good look at the major players in this game and do our own institutional analyses. They are certainly not going to call us on the phone or make press conferences announcing the real intentions if Dr. Kissinger's words in the famous "food as a weapon" document, is anything to go by. I refer to, "In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion."


2. "No Food Shall Be Grown That We Don't Own!"


Monsanto takes a proud global tradition of 12,000 years that has involved millions of farmers through hundreds of generations and kills off their sweat, toll and achievements in just a few years’ time. Making all farmers, and all people, dependent on its products. This is the opposite of food security. After all, when Monsanto et al thoroughly control our food supply, what do you think they will do? Lower prices?

While there can be no doubt that Monsanto is a profitable business, the US agriculture industry still receives tens of billions in direct and indirect subsidies. -
Vandana Shiva on the Problem with Genetically Modified Seeds [10] 


One company religiously carrying out the mission of control and monopoly over food is Monsanto. Avoiding “the appearance of coercion," and pretending to be an ecological saviour “with Taquin's ravishing strides”, Monsanto moves like a ghost! As Jeffrey M. Smith points out, “At a biotech industry conference in January 1999, a representative from Arthur Anderson, LLP explained how they had helped Monsanto design their strategic plan. First, his team asked Monsanto executives what their ideal future looked like in 15 to 20 years. The executives described a world with 100 percent of all commercial seeds genetically modified and patented. Anderson consultants then worked backwards from that goal, and developed the strategy and tactics to achieve it. They presented Monsanto with the steps and procedures needed to obtain a place of industry dominance in a world in which natural seeds were virtually extinct.” [11] 

It is not an accident that a company that sees its success in terms of replacing natural seeds, a company with a history as the producer of Agent Orange, DDT, PCBs, and a host of nature-unfriendly chemicals would style itself as eco-friendly. To fully appreciate the profound nature of this strange behaviour one must first know a little bit about what Monsanto has been up to, since its formation in 1901. Strongly recommended is Brian Tokar's Monsanto A Checkered History: Resurgence & Ecologist (Vol 28 No 5 - September / October 1998). The reason why Monsanto began to portray its image as eco-friendly is due in part to the successes of the rising ecological movements in the sixties and seventies, and the heightening of public consciousness that emerged after the disasters of the 1980s. Joshua Karliner explains in A Brief History of Greenwash, CorpWatch, March 22nd, 2001:

“As the 1980s produced the Bhopal, Chernobyl and Exxon Valdez disasters, the environmental movement gained in strength. In response, greenwash advertisements became even more numerous and more sophisticated, peaking in 1990 on the 20th anniversary of Earth Day. It was during that year of eco-hoopla that "corporate environmentalism" came into its own in the US. The transnationals came to recognize that increasing numbers of consumers wanted to buy green products. In fact, in the early 1990s, one poll found that seventy-seven percent of Americans said that a corporation's environmental reputation affected what they bought.3 In another US poll, eighty-four percent of the people regarded corporate environmental crimes as more serious than insider trading or price fixing.4 [12] 

In 1997, EuropaBio, the largest Biotechnology trade federation, representing 540 companies and 8 national associations, organized EuropaBio '97, European Bioindustry Congress (June 25 – 27, Amsterdam). Faced with a hostile European reception to their products and a bleak prospect for their respective businesses, they commissioned Burson Marsteller (B-M) the world's largest PR firm, operating from 60 offices in 30 different countries, to write up a strategy proposal for achieving a change in public 'perceptions'. The document was leaked to Greenpeace:

“The federation were advised to stay clear of form of public debate and particularly the industry's 'killing fields' - namely 'Public issues of environmental and human health risk'. The task of persuading consumers to embrace genetically modified products should be left to those charged with public trust – politicians and regulators. Instead, the industry should concentrate on the spread of positive stories and symbols, eliciting a message of 'hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem.' 'Symbols', they add, are 'central to politics because they connect to emotions and not logic'. The public, they advised, should be convinced that genetically altered products are not simply safe but 'environmentally superior to standard crop varieties'.” [13] 

In 1998, the then President of the Rockefeller Foundation, Sir Gordon Richard Conway, outlined his plans in his book: The Doubly Green Revolution: Food For All in the 21st Century, [15] (Penguin and University Press, Cornell) ISBN 0-8014-8610-6, in which a clear link is made between biotechnology and global food security. He explains his vision in an article, Food For All In The 21st Century:

“The technologies of the first Green Revolution were developed on experiment stations that were favored with fertile soils. well-controlled water sources, and other factors suitable for high production. There was little perception of the complexity and diversity of farmers' physical environments, let alone the diversity of the economic and social environments. The new Green Revolution must not only benefit the poor more directly, but must also be applicable under highly diverse conditions and be environmentally sustainable.

In effect, the need is for a Doubly Green Revolution, a revolution that is even more productive than the first Green Revolution and even more "green" in terms of conserving natural resources and the environment. During the next three decades, it must aim to repeat the successes of the Green Revolution on a global scale in many diverse localities and be equitable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly. ” This article is drawn from his most recent book. The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the 21st Century (Ithaca. N.Y.: Cornell University Press. 1998). [14]

“Several years ago, Monsanto bought Seminis (a seed company that has 40% of the US seed market), and more recently bought De Ruiter Seeds (one of the top vegetable breeders in the world). Monsanto is now in the vegetable seed business for the first time, and it's in big time. More than 55 percent of store bought lettuce, 75 percent of U.S. tomatoes, and 85 percent of peppers now originate through Monsanto's fingers. (Source) Our salad plate is now being dished out by Monsanto!

Although Monsanto has yet to release many genetically modified vegetables into the market, they spend almost 2 million dollars a day on research and development, so GM vegetables are probably not very far away. (Monsanto currently holds the technology for more than 90 percent of the world’s genetically engineered crops, and they also hold thousands of U.S. seed patents without mentioning their alleged theft of heirloom seeds world-wide.) If you see PVP (Plant Variety Protection) listed after a seed or plant name, that means the seed or plant carries a U.S. patent, and Monsanto could own it.” [15]


3. “The White Man's Dream For Africa”

In September 2006 the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation launched the “Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa” (AGRA) as a joint initiative. AGRA expands on the Rockefeller Foundation’s Green Revolution in Africa Initiative. Founded with an initial commitment of $100 million from the Gates Foundation and another $50 million from the Rockefeller Foundation, today AGRA is the biggest grantee of the Gates Foundation. On 14 June 2007 AGRA announced the appointment of former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan as its first chairman. “Speaking at the World Economic Forum on Africa meeting in Cape Town, where he was due to deliver a keynote address on African agriculture, Mr. Annan said he was deeply honored to be taking up the position and hoped to use it to help drive forward progress on an issue critical to wider African development.” [16] 

AGRA has since transformed its image as a foreign solution to African problems by placing Mr. Kofi Annan firmly as its public face. In a document, Agricultural Development Strategy 2008-2011, prepared by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, we read, “AGRA is an African face and voice for our work and also informs our work as a key strategic partner....” But it must be clearly stated that this has not fooled all the people all the time. Monsanto had earlier on tried to use Mr. Nelson Mandela to soften African resistance and failed. AGRA contents itself, for the time being, with propaganda and the laying of the grounds such as the legislative framework to ensure a comfortable life for bio-tech corporations in Africa, and to round-up the “stake-holders”, or African consumer as well as our poor farmers, into the scheme. Anuradha Mittal observes in the Introduction to Voices From Africa: African Farmers & Environmentalists Speak Out Against a New Green Revolution in Africa [PDF]:

"Despite the Gates Foundation’s rhetoric, AGRA’s vision for agricultural development was not drawn up by African voices, nor does it take into account developing countries’ experience with the first Green Revolution. Instead, this agricultural revolution for Africa was designed by Gordon Conway, President of the Rockefeller Foundation through 2004. The appointment of key staff at the Gates Foundation was also indicative of the direction that AGRA was intended to steer agriculture in Africa. In 2006, the Gates Foundation appointed Dr. Robert Horsch as the Senior Program Officer in the Global Development Program, which directly supervises the AGRA initiative. Horsch came to the foundation after 25 years on the staff of the Monsanto Corporation, one of the world’s biggest biotechnology multinationals and one of the most aggressive promoters of GM crops. At Monsanto, Horsch was the Vice-President for Product and Technology Cooperation, later Vice-President for International Development Partnership, and also a member of the team that developed Monsanto’s YieldGard, BollGard, and RoundUp Ready technologies.” [17]

She continues:

"The appointment of Kofi Annan as AGRA’s chairman was a strategic decision that the Gates Foundation made to silence criticisms that its agricultural development agenda was a “White Man’s Dream for Africa.” In fact, this more reeks of Monsanto’s campaign: “Let the Harvest Begin.” Launched in 1998 to gain acceptance of GE crops around the world by projecting the benefits of the Green Revolution in Asia and its potential in Africa, Monsanto’s campaign managed to draw several respected African leaders, such as Nelson Mandela, to speak for a new Green Revolution in Africa. In response, all of the African delegates (except South Africa) to the UN Food and Agriculture Negotiations on the International Undertaking for Plant Genetic Resources in June 1998 issued a counter statement, “Let Nature’s Harvest Continue.” The delegates clearly stated their objection to multinational companies’ use of the image of the poor and hungry from African countries to push technology that is not safe, environmentally friendly, or economically beneficial." [18] 

In Why is Kofi Annan Fronting For Monsanto? The GMO Assault On Africa, 2010/08/31, Crossed Crocodiles writes: "Kofi Annan has joined with President Obama, Monsanto, AGRA, and the Gates foundation to promote and execute food aid that replaces bags of wheat, rice and corn (agricultural dumping) with bags of pesticides, herbicides, chemical fertilizers and genetically engineered seeds. The end result will be to starve people in Africa and feed corporations in the US and Europe." [19]  

This has since been confirmed in Business English by the perpetrators themselves when the industry called on the G8 members to “spur innovation and engage the private sector by reducing regulatory barriers, building capacity, strengthening intellectual property protections, and adopting and implementing policies to increase trade in commodities and food." [20]

This is a strategy session, and so I am not going to go into the merits and demerits of GM technology. We know the technology has excellent medical applications, such as the preparation of insulin for diabetic patients, or in other medical fields such as "treating for example, inherited diseases such as immune deficiencies, thalassemia, sickle disease, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, and so on." Indeed, the quote on the specific medial applications is a quote from Dr Michael Antoniou, a molecular geneticist, Kings College London (www.kcl.ac.uk). It is an interesting point because one way the GM industry bully the public is to accuse us of "scientific ignorance" whenever their Frankenstein foods are questioned.

In an interview on BBC's "One Planet", he was asked whether or not he was comfortable with the GM crops:

"The people who create GM crops use very similar techniques to yours, different applications though, are you comfortable with that?"

"I am not comfortable at all with the way that GM is being used in agriculture". Dr. Antoniou answer categorically, "because compared to what we do in a clinical context, where not only research is done under contained genes, they are non-replicated. They can't reproduce and spread and cause harm. In agriculture the same technique is used in open fields, the organism can spread in an uncontrolled way and we suffer with the consequences of that forever."

"You use this technology to device medical therapy to help people to live longer and healthier lives," he was further asked, "to keep more of us on the planet for longer, what is wrong with other scientists using these same techniques to fed those extra millions and billions? They say - you heard the argument – that there was a need, a moral moral obligation?"

Dr. Antoniou responded:

"Indeed, the world has a moral obligation to feed itself. What is invariably ignored by advocates of GM crops in explaining why almost a billion of people in the world go to bed, each day, hungry, is that actually, we have more than enough food to feed everybody now. In fact, we have have doubled the amount of food to feed everybody in the world now, but people don't have access to food. And in terms of meeting future food needs, specifically in the face of climate change, then the latest United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation sponsored report clearly pointed that the future in meeting future food needs lie in applying agro-ecological methods. They said that genetic engineering would play little or no role in meeting immediate food needs of the world and future food needs of the world. Which is why the Americans were not signatory. But 62 other nations, actually signed up, including the UK, signed up to that report. We have to take on board, the report compiled by 400 independent scientists from around the world, in all manner of expertise and discipline, which said go forward with low-input, agro-ecological, sustainable agriculture, not GM, because GM simply does not fit the bill." [21]

Ali-Masmadi Jehu-Appiah
Research And Information Committee
Our Food Under Our Control
Accra Freedom Centre, Accra.

Take Action! Join the Campaign:

"Just Say No To GM Foods!" Accra,

Weekly Meeting: Our Food Under Our Control
Time: Every Thursday, at 5.00 pm,
Venue: At the Accra Freedom Centre, Kotoko Avenue, Kokomlemle, Accra,
(next door to the Insight Newspaper Office, and near Benz Gate at Mogya Bi Ye Dom). For further information, please contact: Comrade Duke Tagoe, Accra Freedom Centre, Telephone: (+233) (0)265 743 484; or 0234341541.



REFERENCES:
[2] Food as a Weapon of War Study Guide & Homework Help - eNotes.com http://www.enotes.com/food-weapon-war-reference/food-weapon-war
[3] "How food is being used as a weapon", by Anthony Gucciardi, Wednesday, August 17, 2011 http://www.naturalnews.com
[6] Edible Armaments: Food as a Weapon in the Cold War and Culture by Meghan O’Dea, Departmental Honors Thesis , The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga History Department , [PDF] Food as a Weapon in the - The University of Tennessee at , www.utc.edu/Administration/DepartmentalHonors/ODeaM.pdf
[10] Vandana Shiva on the Problem with Genetically Modified Seeds http://billmoyers.com/segment/vandana-shiva-on-the-problem-with-genetically-modified-seeds/
[12] A Brief History of Greenwash by Joshua Karliner, CorpWatch, March 22nd, 2001 http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=243
[13] [PDF] Monsanto's Failing PR Strategy - The FrankenFood Files, frankenfoodfiles.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/brunofinal.pdf, File Format: PDF/
[14] Food For All In The 21st Century By Gordon Conway [PDF] e-teacher.clanteam.com/conway.pdf, File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - by G Conway The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the 21st Century (Ithaca. N.Y.: Cornell University Press. 1998).
[16] To read the full press release, visit the AGRA Web site
[18] Voices From Africa: African Farmers & Environmentalists Speak Out Against a New Green Revolution in Africa | oaklandinstitute.org http://bit.ly/LEdRVw
[20] Chicago Council On Global Affairs, Upcoming G8 Summit Can Make New Progress in Advancing Global Food Security, http://bit.ly/LDkHdR 
[21] “The father of GM foods, bolivian seeds and wildebeest, Dr Roger Beachy, the father of GM foods on scientific ignorance and our moral obligations, Listen 28 minutes” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00b2rgn. See also, for the transcript, Why Kofi Annan’s “Green Wash” In Africa Does Not Wash! Feature Article of Sunday, 17 October 2010 by Mensah, Nana Akyea http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/artikel.php?ID=195305


FURTHER READING:
Scarce Goods as Political Weapons: The Case of Food, Full Text (PDF) Journal of Peace Research December 1976 13: 277-298, http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/13/4/277.full.pdf
Food as a Weapon, by Bertrand M. Patenaude, January 30, 2007 | Hoover Institution: http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6135
'An Edible History of Humanity': How What We Eat Has Changed the World AlterNet / By Maria Armoudia
Author Tom Standage explains how food has been a weapon of war, an offering for peace, a force of development and imperialism and an organizer of societies. May 21, 2010 | http://www.alternet.org/story/146929/%27an_edible_history_of_humanity%27%3A_how_what_we_eat_has_changed_the_world?paging=off
Food power, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_power

Food as a Weapon of War, eNotes, http://www.enotes.com/food-weapon-war-reference/food-weapon-war

GMO Evidence: Twitter: @GMOEvidence
GMO Evidence is a worldwide user-friendly library of evidence of harm caused by GMOs to animals and humans. United Kingdom · http://gmoevidence.com/



LINKS:

Saturday, 30 March 2013

Ghana On The Verge Of GMO Contamination


Come this year's planting season, that is, within a matter of weeks, Ghana is poised to roll out its first row of genetically modified seeds into our food chain. This revelation came out in the course of a Parliamentary Vetting of Hon. Clement Kofi Humado, as required by the Constitution of Ghana prior to being appointed as a Minister of State. The Minister of Food and Agriculture designate, made a rather startling observation:

Hon. Humado indicated that when given the nod, he would want to see that Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are used by commercial farmers saying, “Parliament recently passed the legal framework and regulatory mechanism and we will have to liberalize the situation so farmers who are interested in all types of seeds including GMO seeds will be allowed to use it. I will want to see that GMOs are used by commercial farmers.” [1] 

Humado-0004
Hon. Humado Taking an oath before the Parliamentary Vetting




Ministerial Vetting Day 2
Published on 25 Jan 2013

President John Mahama's ministerial nominees face the Appointments Committee of Parliament composed of only members of the Majority members of Parliament


This is against the backdrop that in the run-up to the Presidential elections in 2012, one of the key elements cited by the NDC supporters against the NPP was the accusation of “the opposition New Patriotic Party and its presidential candidate, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo of being puppets of multinationals such as the United States’ agricultural company Monsanto.” For example, in predicting a win for the NDC, Africa Confidential published an article on 16 November 2012, Elections 2012: Mahama ahead by a hair, in which it pointed out that “NDC critics claim the NPP’s agricultural expansion policies are based on imposing Monsanto’s genetically modified seed varieties on local farmers. More widely, they paint the centre-right NPP as the party of ‘bosses in suits’ who have little understanding of or interest in the lives of the urban or rural poor.” [2]

The Pan-Africanist International was one of the organisations that flagged the NPP Manifesto on Agriculture. In an article “The NPP Manifesto on Agriculture is Bogus and Fraudulent!", the P-AI argued that:

“Like the poor cat in the adage, who wanted to catch the fish but did not want to wet its paws, the NPP wants a mandate to introduce Genetically Modified Organisms into our food chain, but they do not want a discussion! They do not even want the people to get the full picture, even less, to be informed! We are going to discuss this, whether they like it or not! And we are going to inform the good people of Ghana. There is something fundamentally flawed in the bid by the NPP to seek the mandate to assault our agriculture under false pretences. We want the NPP to come out to clearly explain that anomaly, or to formally rule out the introduction of GM crops under their administration. The people of Ghana need to know if a vote for the NPP is equal to a vote for GM crops. The NPP is being unfair to Ghanaians by asking them to vote NPP on the basis of promises to provide “improved seeds”, a well known term commonly used to disguise and greenwash the fact that those seeds are genetically modified organisms that carry with them a myriad of dangers.”  [3]

GMO Contamination: A Real And Present Danger!
The introduction of genetically modified crops into our food chain is nothing but an unmitigated disaster. There is no independent science studying the performance or the safety of GMOs. The agrochemical companies forbid it by contract. Claims for performance and yields or claims of safety and efficacy can only be regarded as self serving and speculative. There is no independent evidence to support them.

GMOs are not designed to help farming, farmers, increase yields or preserve the environment. They are a predatory business model designed to further enrich giant corporations. Because of patents and royalties the price of seeds farmers pay will continue to climb. Monsanto buys up or crushes the competition, so there are no conventional or alternative seeds available after a few years.
GM traits don't improve yield, it is the underlying quality of the unpatented germplasm, or seed, plus soil quality and water that determine yields. GMO crops are providing opportunity for proliferation of super insect pests and super weeds. Super weeds, resistant to herbicides, now occupy 1/2 of US farmland, in some areas, 90%. GMOs therefore increase the use of increasingly stronger herbicides and pesticides, contrary to the claims made for them, claims that they decrease use of chemicals and are good for the environment.

Farmers are caught by GM crop failures and by the increasing price of seeds, plus the agrochemicals, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, with no way out or relief available, leading to hundreds of farmer suicides in India. Monsanto uses the courts aggressively and sues farmers who inadvertently grow patented GM crops, even if they are growing them accidentally due to cross pollination or other legally obtained seeds. US and Canadian courts have supported Monsanto, awarding huge judgements against farmers.
 
The USDA is not even trying to regulate large areas of GMO research. How can countries, particularly with the often limited resources in developing countries tackle the problems of the unintentional release of GMOs and the resulting damage to native crops and the damage to biological diversity? Seralini's study of the tumours produced in rats fed glycophosphate resistant GM corn should make us all call for more independent scientific studies of the properties of GM foods, and of their long term effects on humans and on the environment.
Thus the attempt by the NDC government to go ahead with commercial farming of GM seeds is clearly a fundamental betrayal of all those who supported the NDC in opposition to the real and present danger the NPP represented in their obvious bid to introduce GMOs into our food chain. The struggle now is to stop the NDC from carrying out such an unconscionable mischief. A people with a history of 500 years of foreign domination of the most horrible forms, including slavery, apartheid, colonialism, and neo-colonialism, and all forms of imperialist aggression, deserve to be treated better than this by their own elected representatives.

These moves to impose genetically engineered crops on Ghanaians by Ghana's political class, both in the opposition and within the ruling government ought to raise a serious alarm that imperialism has not finished with us yet. In the NDC, they have found a convenient stooge to sow the new chains of 21st century enslavement of the people. Where a government becomes an accessory to the new imperialist scramble for Africa, to the detriment of the very people they have been elected to serve, it loses its legitimacy. The least that can be asked is to compel the government to account for its actions.

As Mr. Kwesi Pratt, Jnr., put it recently on a radio and television programme, "We have come to the era of what they call "designer seeds. You understand? And if you look at the concept of "designer seeds", our farmers when they grow maize or anything, leave a certain portion for planting the next season. Now, because the seeds we are bringing in are hybrid, the farmer when he has grown his crop, can no longer reserve his own crops for the next season. So our agriculture is becoming increasingly dependent on the supply of seeds from multinational corporations! How can we allow this to persist? This is a negative practice which we need to end as quickly as possible!"  Kwesi Pratt, Jnr., On "Designer Seeds, (You may listen to the entire programme here: Alhaji & Alhaji, www.ghananewslink.com, 9th Mar 2013.)

GM CROPS - Argentina: The Bad Seeds

 

The country's soy industry is booming but what is the impact of soy production on Argentinians and the environment?
People & Power - http://youtu.be/Ih1p2YhzDAk



REFERENCES:
[1]  Parliament Vets Minister Designate, Tuesday, January 29th, 2013: http://mofa.gov.gh/site/?p=11483
[2] Elections 2012: Mahama ahead by a hair, 16 November 2012, http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=257839
[3] NPP Manifesto on Agriculture is Bogus and Fraudulent! September 10, 2012, http://www.panafricanistinternational.org/?p=1832

Friday, 29 March 2013

Should Africa Go GMO Free?


Should Africa Go GMO Free?

 

Thursday, 28 March 2013

Join the Campaign: "Just Say No To GM Foods!" Accra, GHANA...

Weekly Meeting: Our Food Under Our Control

Time: Every Thursday, at 5.00 pm,


Venue: At the Accra Freedom Centre, Kotoko Avenue, Kokomlemle, Accra,
(next door to the Insight Newspaper Office, and near Benz Gate at Mogya Bi Ye Dom).

For further information, please contact:

Comrade Duke Tagoe, Accra Freedom Centre,
Telephone: (+233) (0)265 743 484; or 0234341541.


Join the Campaign!
 "Just Say No To GM Foods!"