Going red over green
US President Bush was as usual being mealy-mouthed when he made his now famous statement holding China and India responsible for the global food crisis. In a way, Bush is like those IPL cheerleaders: While the latter lack in the clothes department, the President of US of A has always found himself short of truth. And sometimes, he could be plainly lying, as he did in the case of Iraq and its alleged possession of WMD. But this time, he was joined in his charade by two more respectable entities (three, if we include US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the bronze-skinned straight shooter, who unfortunately gets her target wrong all the time!): the EU and IMF.
There are two things here. One, we can argue till the cows come home that it is not India and China, but the US that is responsible for the “famine-like” situation that the world faces today. In fact, data from the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) clearly establishes the US as the “cereal killer”, thanks to its ravenous appetite.
According to FAO, cereal consumption by India is estimated to have grown 2.17 % from 193.1 million tonnes in 2006-07 to 197.3 million tonnes in 2007-08; China’s consumption rose 1.8 % from 382.2 million tonnes to 389.1 million tones, during the same period. Compare this with the US growth: an 11.81 % rise from 277.6 million tonnes to 310.4 million tonnes. Data that would make anyone who blame the Asian behemoths for the food crisis eat humble pie.
But the larger issue is, even assuming that what Bush, Condy and a whole lot of others are saying is right—that our standard of living is indeed getting better by the day with a corresponding increase in the consumption of food items including meat—should we take it so personally? After all, until a few years ago, we used to get equally agitated whenever the Western world referred to India as a nation of snake charmers and fakirs. So isn’t this a welcome change? Yes, Bush & Co is just talking about Indians’ growing affluence to hide their own shortcomings and myopic policies. So what? Unknowingly, the big bully has ended up promoting Brand India. It’s time we built up on it.
Another positive fallout of the food crisis is that it has brought the focus back on the alternative fuels debate. According to reports, the US used about 30 million tonnes of corn to produce bio-fuels last year. And that is significant by any account. While this shows that the US is really serious about reducing its dependence on fossil fuels given the steadily increasing prices of crude (hovering at $120/barrel now, it might soon touch, hold yourself, $200/barrel), it has also triggered a serious stand-off between the clean fuel and pro-nature groups.
According to pro-nature groups, one can feed a man for a year with corn that is used to make fuel to fill the tank of an SUV once. These groups are now urging a look at inedible crops for making fuel instead of producing it using corn or sugarcane.
Similarly, the pro-nature groups lament the destruction of vast tracts of virgin forests for growing crops to cater to fuel needs. It may take a few years before the green fuel lobby comes up with alternatives that do not threaten either the food security or our fragile eco system. But the good thing is that this is first time that the world is looking at alternative fuels with real seriousness. Even better—the US is leading the effort.
A real bully it may be, but the US does have a domino effect on the world stage. After its elusive search for WMDs in Iraq, let’s hope it hits the bull’s eye at home with a GFMT—Green Fuel for Mass Transportation.
