In a few days, the agreement on extending grain exports between Russia and Ukraine will expire. As a global grain supplier, the attack on Ukraine and the brief export stop last year threatened the food supply of many countries. The war did not trigger a hunger crisis, but only exacerbated it in some countries, says Anja Osterhaus from the aid organization Oxfam. However, the solution to the problem is not to produce more food, she explains in an interview with ntv.de.
ntv.de: Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is waging a “hunger war” in Ukraine. What exactly does this term mean?
Anja Osterhaus: What is meant by this is above all the escalation last summer, when the ships for grain exports from Ukraine were no longer able to leave the ports. As a result, it was suddenly no longer possible for many countries to import grain from there.
Which countries were hit particularly hard?
This was a disaster for countries particularly dependent on Ukrainian grain imports, such as Eritrea. Before the war, the country imported 100 percent of its grain from Russia and Ukraine. As soon as a source is no longer accessible, it is immediately very threatening. Especially for countries like Eritrea, Somalia and Yemen, where people are already suffering from hunger anyway. The term “hunger war” is a political one and was also used very politically.
Negotiations with Russia on extending the agreement on grain exports across the Black Sea are scheduled to begin this week. What would be the impact this time if the agreement is not renewed or if grain ships are not allowed to leave ports for a while?
This so-called Black Sea Grain Initiative solved the acute problem last summer. But if you look at where the grain from Ukraine goes, it’s not just low-income countries. Not everything goes to Somalia, Yemen or Eritrea. According to statistics from the European Council, two-thirds of wheat exports from Russia and Ukraine go to so-called developing countries, and about half for corn. The rest goes to so-called developed countries. This grain agreement is important, but it doesn’t just benefit poor countries, as is often assumed.
As a result of the war, food prices have risen worldwide. What else does this mean for the hunger crisis?
The hunger crisis existed before the outbreak of the Ukraine war. That is often forgotten. The world community has committed to end world hunger by 2030. We were also on a very good path for many years. From 1990 to 2015, the number of people suffering from hunger dropped significantly, by over 200 million people, despite the fact that there was a strong population growth at the same time. But in recent years the number of starving people has risen again. The situation in many countries has deteriorated significantly during the corona pandemic. There are also other problems, such as local conflicts or the climate crisis. These factors led to a hunger crisis in Ukraine long before war broke out, particularly in Africa but also in Afghanistan and Yemen. The export problems in the Ukraine then led to a significant aggravation in individual countries. So it is not true that the hunger crisis was triggered by the war. This made her even worse. Now the situation is that every tenth person in the world is starving.
Children in particular are affected.
In all crises, children and women are always the hardest hit. These are always the ones who suffer the most, also from hunger. The scale is so extreme that many die from it.
Are there other factors that are exacerbating and have exacerbated the hunger crisis in recent years?
The climate crisis is very strong. In a study, we found that famine in climate crisis areas has more than doubled in the last six years. This includes not only drought, but also flooding or other extreme weather.
Countries in Africa in particular are struggling with drought.
A very common phenomenon. In parts of East Africa there was no rain at all for the fourth or fifth time in a row last year. There have been occasions when there has been no rain for a season or two, but not for several years in a row. And these crises hit people who were already severely weakened by the economic consequences of the pandemic. Then there are the consequences of climate change, such as water shortages and the increased prices triggered by the war. These multiple causes have greatly exacerbated the hunger crisis.
Do you think there is a solution to the problem of hunger? Can we manage to get back on the good path we had eight years ago?
Yes. Interestingly enough, people think the solution lies in producing more food. That’s not the case. We have more than enough food in the world. Another misconception is that price increases are due to a lack of food. This is certainly possible locally in certain places when there is no wheat. Overall, however, there is enough food, it is just wrongly distributed. The food market is dominated by a few large corporations that have a very strong influence on pricing. Another problem is dependence of some countries on imports. That Somalia faces catastrophe if exports from Ukraine stop working is a fundamental problem. The fact is that in Asia and large parts of Africa, for example, 70 percent of the local food supply is provided by small farmers.
How to achieve this?
Self-sufficiency would have to be promoted much more intensively in order to be less susceptible to such crises. It’s not necessarily a question of money, it’s a question of what are the priorities of those distributing the money? Oxfam is a strong advocate for food sovereignty. The idea behind this is that local production of food is taken very seriously and that greater independence from imports can be achieved as a result.
Vivian Micks spoke to Anja Osterhaus
