The L.A. Times ran an op-ed yesterday suggesting the U.S. use the world food crisis as an opportunity to reshape U.S. agricultural policy, foreign aid programs and image abroad.
Some excerpts:
“In 1948, a first lieutenant in the Air Force named Gail Halvorsen began dropping candy bars attached to tiny handkerchief parachutes to the hungry children of Berlin. Many had never tasted chocolate before. The kindness of the “Candy Bomber” came to symbolize the spirit of American humanitarianism…
The global food crisis offers the United States a fresh opportunity to show the world its humanitarian mettle. In 2007, with prices soaring, the volume of food donated by rich countries to hungry ones actually shrank 15% to the lowest levels in nearly five decades, according to the United Nations….
So the U.S. will be asked to do more — and it should. The question is whether it can turn this crisis into an opportunity to remake the agricultural and aid policies that have racked up a 50-year record of expensive failure…
The big thinkers in both presidential campaigns should be mapping out more thoughtful responses to the global food challenge. That means crafting plans both to help the hungry and to improve perceptions of the United States in strategic and suffering areas.”
Read the full piece here.
June 10, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Hey Porter, thanks so much for the first update from this forum. We value your ideas & input in the ONE Blog as Oxfam is one of the STELLAR partner organizations of ONE and has been essential in the movement to end extreme poverty for decades.
I completely agree with your statement:
“We need to change our approaches on the ground. Specifically, U.S. foreign aid must do more to put poor countries and poor people in control of their own future. True partnership means ceding a measure of control, something that is hard for Washington to do. It is the difference between charity and investment.”
To this end, I hope this forum is a success in redirecting U.S. foreign assistance into more NGO activities in the poorest parts of the world. It simply makes sense.
But, I must stress ONE idea: without the re-authorization of PEPFAR, millions of people who would otherwise be around to partake in the fruits of Oxfam’s hark work on their behalf will simply be gone – no longer living because they are not able to get the medications that they need to keep them alive & productive.
So while all of you discuss alternatives to the present ways in which U.S. foreign assistance is currently distributed, I highly urge you and the others there from ONE to STAND UP & VOICE YOUR SUPPORT OF PEPFAR and attempt to garner the support of the Senators there to this action.
It simply makes not a lot of sense to discuss alternatives to current U.S. foreign assistance
distribution if millions of people will not be alive to benefit from it.
ALWAYS FOREVER, ONE – debbie
http://www.mpwn-uganda.org
June 13, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I’d surprise chunk wasn’t at raspberries,