The G8 Summit Finale: Food For Thought?

Leaders of the G8 nations have today pledged $20 billion, $5 billion more than expected, in order to boost food supplies within many of the world's poorest nations. It is hoped that this investment will partly fund an initiative for these nations to develop their own agriculture and, ultimately, become self-sufficient. But has the G8 actually done enough for these nations?

President Obama believes that we have a "moral obligation as well as a national security interest" to help developing nations in becoming self-sufficient. Furthermore, he sees this as an achieveable target. By providing significant resources to these poorer nations, the G8 countries can begin fulfilling this ‘moral obligation’ and highlight the fact that food security should not be synonymous with food aid. Obama’s words, however, will likely raise questions as to whether this aid is being given out of real altruism, or as a pre-emptive protection against the emergence of 'new security threats' to developed nations. When observed in this way, his words can be seen as somewhat paradoxical, how are we fulfilling a moral obligation if we are providing this aid in order for ourselves to remain ‘safe’?

President Obama also specified that this monetary assistance should not be seen as an end in itself in providing a helping hand to developing nations. Rather, that institutions such as the World Bank will also play a key role in what will hopefully be the poorer nations triumphant journey to self-sustainability. It is positive to see that the G8 nations are aware that simply throwing money at these nations will not solve their problems.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi stated that the key message from African nations is that the G8 has lived up to its commitments, but has it really? Some aid organizations have criticized the figure pledged, as the promise made in the 2005 G8 summit - to increase annual aid levels to sub-Saharan Africa by $25bn by 2010 - has not been fulfilled. Furthermore, the summit’s host, Italy, has come under fire by aid agencies for cutting aid this year. In addition, with the UK giving more aid as a percentage of GDP than both the USA and Japan combined, we must question whether all G8 countries are entirely committed to solving these problems?

Certainly, the head of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Agency, Jacques Diouf does not think so. Diouf criticises the aid pledged, stating that it falls short of what is needed. Nevertheless, he regards it as a "big jump" forward compared to what was expected before the summit. Details of the deal, and the time frame within which the promises will be delivered are yet to be confirmed, contributing to condemnation that the G8’s smoke-and-mirrors approach to its commitments leaves a lot to be desired.

So, as another G8 summit comes to a close, we once more have seemingly promising pledges from the leaders of the G8 nations. However, one must ask whether these promises live up to the expectations that many, predominantly aid agencies, had and to what extent the G8 nations will stand by their pledges and commitments.

LAB