(Photo di: Aravinda Rathnayake/Flickr) Article by Federico Guerrieri, translation by writtenwordtranslations The World Summit on Food Security, organised by the FAO, took place in Rome on 15 November. The figures for the current year, given in mid-October by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, showed that the number of people suffering from hunger has reached over 1 billion, or 9% more than the previous year. Those numbers have not been reached since 1970. In rich countries, about 15 Million people do not have food security, which is very low compared to 642 Million in the Asia-Pacific region, 265 Million of Sub-Saharan Africa, 53 Million in Latin America and 42 Million in North and East Africa. Children are the category of population that is most affected, with over 6 Million deaths due to shortage of food every year. Precisely on the day that the United States and China decided that it would be impossible, in Copenhagen, to sign a new treaty on global warming that would bind all 192 countries present in the Danish capital, during the summit on food security the Secretary-General of the UN, Ban Ki-moon, recalled how ‘there cannot be food security without climate security’, saying that ‘this is the reason why in Copenhagen we need a global agreement that will constitute a solid foundation for a legally binding agreement about climate change. We have to reduce the emissions that are causing climate change, we have to keep the global temperature increase under two degrees and we have to help the more vulnerable to adapt. Despite the dramatic situation, the leaders of the countries that are part of the G8 decided not to participate to the summit; the representatives present at the summit decided not to give any further economic resources to fight against hunger in the world. The various government representatives thought of five principles to feed the poor. As it was also reported in La Repubblica and Il Sole 24 Ore, the ‘five principles of Rome for a sustainable food security’ can be summarised as follows: 1) emphasise the responsibility of national governments to resolve poverty and emphasise the necessity of investing in rural development plans; 2) support a major coordination of national, regional and global strategies for better use of resources; 3) support a ‘binary’ approach consisting of direct action responding to the immediate food emergency, but also consisting in the adoption of mid-term programmes to eliminate the deeper causes of poverty and malnutrition; 4) bring about a multilateral system to play a central part, with constant improvements of efficiency, reactivity and of the coordination and effectiveness of multilateral institutions; 5) assuring the sustained and sustainable involvement of all partners, investing in agriculture and food security in a well-timed and reliable way, with the allocation of the necessary resources within biennial plans and programmes. The president of the Italian NGO Association, Sergio Marelli, emphasised that ‘having removed the plan for the complete elimination of hunger in the world by 2025, getting rid of the necessity of allocating 44 Billion Dollars per year for agricultural support, as the FAO Director General Diouf asked for, means this declaration is a document devoid of any instrument that would make the fight against hunger in the world effective’. Oxfam International, despite having said the document was appreciable, recalls how at the same time it is not very credible due to ‘too many omissions, because it does not indicate much commitment nor go very deep.’ In addition, even the FAO’s policy is not all good. The Christoffersen Commission, an external evaluation committee that was given the task by the UN of evaluating the FAO, showed how half of the 784 Million spent by the FAO in the two-year period of 2008-2009 were used to fund the organisation’s management, with only 15% of the spending dedicated to resources that purely regarded food. Moreover, Henry Saragih, the General Coordinator of ‘La Via Campesinà’, an international movement of small farmers, accuses the FAO of focusing on multinationals when in fact 80% of the people suffering from huger live in rural areas. As showed in recent articles, the EU’s trade policy is directly responsible for the worsening of the quality of life in developing countries and in the third-world. In particular, by reducing the world’s food stock, the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) contributed to the worsening of the standard of living of small farmers, fishermen and other small businessmen in developing countries. The EU must recognise its own responsibilities and focus on finding long-term solutions to the poverty afflicting inhabitants of developing countries and taking into account the devastating effects that climate change will have, particularly on inhabitants of the Third World. The United States and their ultra-liberal and capitalist politico-economic model are no less responsible than the European Union for having left the major part of the world population in poverty. Gorbachev, at the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall celebrations, emphasised how the current economic crisis was necessary in order to bare the defects of the current Western model of development that was imposed upon the rest of the world as the only one possible, highlighting how not only bureaucratic Socialism but also ultra-liberal Capitalism are in need of important democratic reforms of its perestroika.