1. Inyun Choi 2. Summit disappoints UN food chief 3. A few days ago I watched a piece of news on TV that reported that FAO didn’t reach the satisfying affirmation for saving the poor from the lack of food. This article is related to that issue. Even though it is justice that all together try to solve the problem of international hunger, the final declaration at this international conference in Rome was not enough to the UN’s needs due to some political issues amongst countries. More than 1 billion people are under the hunger, while, food is being taken away in the ocean by whom is controlling the price of food of the world. I think there must be the limit to stand by themselves, poor countries, without aid policies in these circumstances. --------------------------------- The head of the UN food agency, Jacques Diouf, says he is not satisfied with the final declaration of the UN world food summit in Rome. Mr Diouf criticised the declaration - which vowed "urgent action" to boost food security - for not including exact targets to reduce hunger. Aid agency Oxfam also condemned the statement as "un-costed, unfunded and unaccountable". The UN estimates more than one billion people worldwide are going hungry. It warns that if more land is not used for food production, 370 million people could face famine by 2050. Unusually frank The summit's final declaration was issued on the first day of the three-day meeting. Mr Diouf, head of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), said he was not in the room when negotiators finalised the statement. But he said he regretted the absence of a deadline for the total eradication of world hunger - referring to the UN Millennium Development Goal deadline of 2015. "I thought it made sense to set that target, and I thought we would be discussing whether it should be in four years or five years or so on, not that we would be eliminating any target date in the declaration," he said. "I am not satisfied that some of the concrete proposals I made were not accepted. There was no consensus on this and I regret it."
The BBC's David Loyn in Rome says it was an unusually frank admission from an international civil servant, and reveals frustration that political impetus to increase spending on agriculture may have been lost. The summit also rejected the UN's call to commit $44bn (£26bn) annually for agricultural development in developing nations. Matt Grainger, of Oxfam, called the summit a "massive wasted opportunity". Vatican Radio called the lack of financial targets "disturbing" and Greenpeace described the declaration as "empty rhetoric". Critics have questioned whether the summit would be effective, as most of the leaders of the world's richest nations are not attending. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is the only leader from one of the G8 leading industrialised countries to take part. Opening the summit, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for a "single global vision" from world leaders to address the problems of world hunger and pollution. Pope Benedict XVI also addressed ministers, calling for an end to the "greed" of financial speculation on food prices. The World Summit on Food Security comes a year after major rises in food prices caused chaos in many developing countries. ------------ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8363555.stm
This article is very much in touch with the recent topic in class about piracy, that is, maybe some journalists would be helped along if they were shown the clips from Journeyman? In stead of looking at where we can find loopholes of geography or how to stop the pirates, one should might consider why this piracy suddenly is appearing. Some would even say, that if piracy was THAT giving to the African people, then they just might have done it many years ago. In my opinion many western journalists are 'sleeping in class', completely forgetting some of the most essential features of being a journalist; Where (Check), When (check) and why....???? Nobody is asking why.
------
Why have the world's most advanced navies failed to end piracy in the seas around Somalia? The BBC's Middle East correspondent Paul Wood reports from the EU anti-piracy taskforce flagship, Evertsen, in the Gulf of Aden.
The Dutch frigate Evertsen is a reassuring sight for the civilian ships dotted around the horizon as she ploughs steadily through the calm, glittering waters of the Gulf of Aden. But all the bristling firepower of the EU's anti-piracy task force has not been enough to remove the threat of piracy from the seas around Somalia. Why has it been so difficult for the world's most advanced navies to defeat pirates who are armed with just Kalashnikovs and rocket- propelled grenades? It is true there has not been a successful hijacking since July in the Gulf of Aden, the corridor between Yemen and Somalia which leads to the Suez Canal. That is of enormous importance, since 20% of the world's shipping travels this way. 'Tiny chance' But the pirates have not been defeated. They have just moved south into the Indian Ocean, continuing to plague the waters known as the Somali Basin. This is where the British couple, Paul and Rachel Chandler, were seized from their yacht.
The first problem for the European force is one of simple geography. Along with other navies concerned about the piracy problem, it has to patrol an area the size of western Europe. They could be several days away from a vessel when it is boarded by pirates. So there is only a tiny chance of catching the pirates in the act of trying to board a civilian vessel - and even then, the warships are limited in what they can do. Often they cannot use the immense firepower at their disposal. "This is not so much an enemy, that would sound like a war - and we're doing legal work with military means," says Cdr Pieter Bindt, commander of the EU's anti-piracy taskforce. "They [the pirates] are very adaptive; they react to what we do and they have a very large area where they can start from: the Somali coast, which is thousands of miles long." 'Why not just blow them out of the water?' I asked. "In the Western world we like to have due process in legal issues," he said. "It would be the same as if somebody in London looking like a burglar would be shot on sight, we just don't that." 'Knowing the law' In the Evertsen's operations room, a red square on a nautical map shows the progress of a PAG, or Pirate Action Group.
This is usually two small skiffs, or speed boats just a few metres long, and a mother skiff, slightly bigger, carrying food, fuel and ammunition. A Greek frigate has been sent to intercept this particular PAG, but after boarding the tiny skiffs, the suspected pirates are questioned and released. The pirates know the law. When they see a naval frigate coming, they dump their weapons, boarding ladder, and even satellite telephones over the side. This is what has happened with the pirates being tracked in the operations room. Everyone fully expects them simply to return to shore to re-equip themselves and a few days later set out to sea again, hunting for vulnerable ships. The ransoms, often several million dollars, are enough to comfortably pay for new equipment.
A very down to earth* kind of guy. I'm an environmental sociologist interested in establishing material and organizational sustainability worldwide. I'm always looking for interesting materials/technologies, inspiring ideas, or institutional examples of sustainability to inspire others to recognize their choices now. To be fatalistic about an unsustainable world is a sign of a captive mind, given all our options.
*(If "earth" is defined in a planetary sense, concerning comparative historical knowledge and interest in the past 10,000 years or so anywhere...) See both blogs.
1. Inyun Choi
ReplyDelete2. Summit disappoints UN food chief
3. A few days ago I watched a piece of news on TV that reported that FAO didn’t reach the satisfying affirmation for saving the poor from the lack of food. This article is related to that issue. Even though it is justice that all together try to solve the problem of international hunger, the final declaration at this international conference in Rome was not enough to the UN’s needs due to some political issues amongst countries. More than 1 billion people are under the hunger, while, food is being taken away in the ocean by whom is controlling the price of food of the world. I think there must be the limit to stand by themselves, poor countries, without aid policies in these circumstances.
---------------------------------
The head of the UN food agency, Jacques Diouf, says he is not satisfied with the final declaration of the UN world food summit in Rome.
Mr Diouf criticised the declaration - which vowed "urgent action" to boost food security - for not including exact targets to reduce hunger.
Aid agency Oxfam also condemned the statement as "un-costed, unfunded and unaccountable".
The UN estimates more than one billion people worldwide are going hungry.
It warns that if more land is not used for food production, 370 million people could face famine by 2050.
Unusually frank
The summit's final declaration was issued on the first day of the three-day meeting.
Mr Diouf, head of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), said he was not in the room when negotiators finalised the statement.
But he said he regretted the absence of a deadline for the total eradication of world hunger - referring to the UN Millennium Development Goal deadline of 2015.
"I thought it made sense to set that target, and I thought we would be discussing whether it should be in four years or five years or so on, not that we would be eliminating any target date in the declaration," he said.
"I am not satisfied that some of the concrete proposals I made were not accepted. There was no consensus on this and I regret it."
The BBC's David Loyn in Rome says it was an unusually frank admission from an international civil servant, and reveals frustration that political impetus to increase spending on agriculture may have been lost.
The summit also rejected the UN's call to commit $44bn (£26bn) annually for agricultural development in developing nations.
Matt Grainger, of Oxfam, called the summit a "massive wasted opportunity".
Vatican Radio called the lack of financial targets "disturbing" and Greenpeace described the declaration as "empty rhetoric".
Critics have questioned whether the summit would be effective, as most of the leaders of the world's richest nations are not attending.
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is the only leader from one of the G8 leading industrialised countries to take part.
Opening the summit, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for a "single global vision" from world leaders to address the problems of world hunger and pollution.
Pope Benedict XVI also addressed ministers, calling for an end to the "greed" of financial speculation on food prices.
The World Summit on Food Security comes a year after major rises in food prices caused chaos in many developing countries.
------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8363555.stm
Christoffer Grønlund
ReplyDeleteCan Somali pirates be defeated?
------
This article is very much in touch with the recent topic in class about piracy, that is, maybe some journalists would be helped along if they were shown the clips from Journeyman? In stead of looking at where we can find loopholes of geography or how to stop the pirates, one should might consider why this piracy suddenly is appearing. Some would even say, that if piracy was THAT giving to the African people, then they just might have done it many years ago. In my opinion many western journalists are 'sleeping in class', completely forgetting some of the most essential features of being a journalist; Where (Check), When (check) and why....???? Nobody is asking why.
------
Why have the world's most advanced navies failed to end piracy in the seas around Somalia?
The BBC's Middle East correspondent Paul Wood reports from the EU anti-piracy taskforce flagship, Evertsen, in the Gulf of Aden.
The Dutch frigate Evertsen is a reassuring sight for the civilian ships dotted around the horizon as she ploughs steadily through the calm, glittering waters of the Gulf of Aden.
But all the bristling firepower of the EU's anti-piracy task force has not been enough to remove the threat of piracy from the seas around Somalia.
Why has it been so difficult for the world's most advanced navies to defeat pirates who are armed with just Kalashnikovs and rocket- propelled grenades?
It is true there has not been a successful hijacking since July in the Gulf of Aden, the corridor between Yemen and Somalia which leads to the Suez Canal. That is of enormous importance, since 20% of the world's shipping travels this way.
'Tiny chance'
But the pirates have not been defeated. They have just moved south into the Indian Ocean, continuing to plague the waters known as the Somali Basin. This is where the British couple, Paul and Rachel Chandler, were seized from their yacht.
The first problem for the European force is one of simple geography.
Along with other navies concerned about the piracy problem, it has to patrol an area the size of western Europe. They could be several days away from a vessel when it is boarded by pirates.
So there is only a tiny chance of catching the pirates in the act of trying to board a civilian vessel - and even then, the warships are limited in what they can do. Often they cannot use the immense firepower at their disposal.
"This is not so much an enemy, that would sound like a war - and we're doing legal work with military means," says Cdr Pieter Bindt, commander of the EU's anti-piracy taskforce.
"They [the pirates] are very adaptive; they react to what we do and they have a very large area where they can start from: the Somali coast, which is thousands of miles long."
'Why not just blow them out of the water?' I asked.
"In the Western world we like to have due process in legal issues," he said. "It would be the same as if somebody in London looking like a burglar would be shot on sight, we just don't that."
'Knowing the law'
In the Evertsen's operations room, a red square on a nautical map shows the progress of a PAG, or Pirate Action Group.
This is usually two small skiffs, or speed boats just a few metres long, and a mother skiff, slightly bigger, carrying food, fuel and ammunition.
A Greek frigate has been sent to intercept this particular PAG, but after boarding the tiny skiffs, the suspected pirates are questioned and released.
The pirates know the law. When they see a naval frigate coming, they dump their weapons, boarding ladder, and even satellite telephones over the side. This is what has happened with the pirates being tracked in the operations room.
Everyone fully expects them simply to return to shore to re-equip themselves and a few days later set out to sea again, hunting for vulnerable ships. The ransoms, often several million dollars, are enough to comfortably pay for new equipment.
---
Whole article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8371139.stm