THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOOD CRISIS IN VENEZUELA (II)
Clara Sanchez
4 Aug 2021 , 2:44 pm .
here are powerful States that use the UN multilateral organizations as instruments to validate humanitarian crises (Photo: @FAO_Venezuela / Twitter)
HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
In the first part of " The construction of a food crisis in Venezuela"it was outlined how military options began to be used by the UN to deliver food to Somalia and Ethiopia in the early 1990s, evolving to the formal use of force to justify interventions for supposedly humanitarian reasons, as in Libya in 2011, until the manipulation of the Venezuelan food situation in the midst of the imposition of coercive measures unilaterally imposed by the United States, protected by the European Union, the OAS, the Lima Group, USAID, large businessmen, and internally by the National Assembly 2016-2020, to insert into the world imagination the urgent need for a military intervention under the "responsibility to protect" (R2P).
This second part will show the use of UN multilateral organizations as instruments to validate humanitarian crises, promoted by the states of greater power, moved by their own interests and on behalf of the international community, through non-state actors such as agencies, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), the so-called civil society, private actors and even large companies, warning and admitting in turn the possibility of military interventions in which external interference such as that of the United States against Venezuela is not considered, and where only The results of certain situations are revealed by isolating or hiding the cause, which is generally hidden behind conventional, unconventional or diffuse wars, and methods such as the blockade and the generalized siege of Venezuela since 2014.
FOOD AS A HUMAN RIGHT
In this case, the right to food is dragged into this framework of manipulation of human rights, which are part of the securitization process that was carried out with the concept of human security, formally used between 1993-1994 and finally promoted at the Millennium Summit of the year 2000, where any deterioration of the general categories of this in the economic, food, health, environment, community, political, personal and other environments that over time have been incorporated, come to provide preventive content by monitoring indicators, considering among its doctrine of prevention and humanitarian interventions, also, the collaboration of large transnational corporations in the resolution of conflicts.
In this sense, the second part of "The construction of a food crisis in Venezuela" is based on the analysis of four types of indicators from different organizations, where high-level multilateral discussions on world food are carried out, and the reports and specialized publications of the raw records that, as affirmed by members of official delegations from some countries, and later only reproduced by academics, politicians and journalists as first-hand data, whose topics and positions can change radically from one year to another. another, seeking to go unnoticed, clarifying in advance, without the intention of devaluing the situation of increased food insecurity in Venezuela,in the midst of the siege that the country has suffered since 2014 where the population has been targeted to violate national power.
Among the indicators, the Prevalence of Undernourishment Index (IPS) was taken as well as the Prevalence of Food Insecurity, which is measured through the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES), both from the United Nations Organization for the Food and Agriculture (FAO); the CARI or ECRI survey of the World Food Program (WFP); and the Integrated Food Safety Classification System (CIF or IPC) of the Food Safety Information Network (SFIN), to which FAO, WFP and 14 other organizations, agencies, NGOs, civil society and individuals belong.
For this, it is necessary to differentiate that, when speaking of IPS or PoU, FAO's Prevalence of Undernourishment Index , refers to national estimates of food availability and consumption, as well as caloric needs, which considers insufficient consumption of dietary energy in a population, being chronic when not enough calories are consumed, in this case becoming undernourishment related to hunger and which, in the world today, according to the latest report (2021) of the FAO, reaches 768 million people, 9.9% of the world's population. Its scale: <5% is very low; 5% to 14.9% is moderately low; 15% to 24.9% is moderately high; 25% to 34.9% is high; and 35% or more is very high.
In addition to the IPS, FAO has applied the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) since 2014 , in which, through face-to-face interviews based on the experiences of individuals and households, highlights the difficulties in accessing food due to lack of availability or due to lack of financial resources to obtain them. From which three levels emerge: mild, moderate food insecurity (skipped a meal or ran out of food occasionally) and severe (go without food for several days, several times a year). The latter is the end of the scale, where the so-called "hungry" or hungry population are found, which complements the IPS or PoU.
While WFP applies the survey of the Consolidated Approach to Report Food Security Indicators ( CARI or ECRI ), through a mathematical tabulation of data collected in households on consumption, deficit, poverty level, proportion of food expenditures and strategies applied to survive, finally building a console whose results also based on experience are four levels of food insecurity that analyzes and reports on a population: safe, marginal, moderate and severe.
And finally, the IPC or CIF, Integrated Classification of Food Security in Phases , which was originally developed in 2004 to be used in Somalia by the Food and Nutrition Security Analysis Unit of FAO, measures together with the Cadre Harmonisé indicator ( CH) 'acute' food insecurity , having five phases ranging from adequate and stable access to food or Phase 1 and Phase 2 of stress, to phases based on the parameters of extreme hunger or Phase 3 (Crisis); 4 (Emergency); and 5 (Famine or Catastrophe).
Phase 3 or CPI / CH Crisis or higher (Phase 4 and Phase 5) is characterized by a critical and accentuated lack of access to food, high levels of malnutrition, and accelerated depletion of livelihood assets. If it is prolonged in time, it leads to a humanitarian emergency due to excess mortality.
With the CIF or IPC, the creation of technical consensus of multiple actors and agencies is used to determine the severity of food insecurity, according to experts from different disciplines who debate 'reliable' evidence through the use of secondary data, therefore, it has been considered an accessory of the existing information systems, whose purpose is to identify the humanitarian phase that allows emergency responses, a tool to analyze situations and implications of future interventions, according to the severity of the food situation, as well as the financing possibilities among the donors.
In summary, with this indicator, through consensus, the need for humanitarian intervention is identified, endorsed by multiple actors, classifying food insecurity 'acute' and chronic, and since 2019 the 'probable famine' or acute malnutrition in a country.
Since 2017, the CIF or IPC is related to the creation of the Food Safety Information Network ( FSIN), as an initiative of the so-called Global Network against Food Crises made up of 16 UN agencies, NGOs, civil society, donors and even individuals grouped in the USAID Famine Early Warning Systems Network (Fews Net), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Standing Interstate Committee for the Fight against Drought in the Sahel (CILSS), the Food Safety Group (FSC), the Global Nutrition Cluster (GNC), the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) in the Horn of Africa, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) of the Consortium of Research Centers (CGIAR), the Integrated Food Safety Phase Classification (CIF or IPC) ,the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Central American Integration System (SICA), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Program (WFP), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the European Commission, to publish an annual report on Food Crises in the world.the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the European Commission, to publish an annual report on Food Crises in the world.the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the European Commission, to publish an annual report on Food Crises in the world.
In addition, it participates through the IPC Global Platform: UK Aid (Direct Aid from the United Kingdom) of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office as a funding agency, CARE, Save the Children and OXFAM (19 NGOs).
Global Reports on Food Crises that are possible thanks to the 'generous' funding of the European Commission and USAID, as recognized in each publication of these, apart from being constituted as financing agencies of the IPC or CIF together with UK Aid.
ABOUT THE GLOBAL REPORT OF FOOD CRISIS IN THE WORLD AND THE CASE OF VENEZUELA
In 2015, the Joint Research Center of the European Commission prepared a report on food crises at the global level and invited FAO and WFP to contribute additional data, and from 2016 they began to incorporate more partners with the aim of producing a consensus-based report, promoted by FAO, WFP and IFPRI.
Since the first report published in 2017 , an attempt was made to incorporate Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia as countries in food crisis, however "the lack of evidence and insufficient data prevented the team from estimating populations in situations of food insecurity."
In 2018, again in the report, it was possible to read that there were "countries of interest" where "food security was also a matter of concern, such as Korea and Venezuela, (also Cuba), but no estimate could be made of the number of people in food insecurity in these , due to lack of data ".
countries-of-interest-by-the-grcf-2018-to-determine-populations-in-phase-of-food-crisis-or-higher.png
Venezuela considered as a country of interest by the Global Network against Food Crisis in the GRCF 2018 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2018)
However, it was anticipated that in Venezuela the food crisis could be inferred by "political instability aggravated by economic crisis", and there were also "6.7 million people depending on the government food distribution program, and according to Venezuelan reports, more of a million people had left the country due to the shortage of basic products ". In this case, it was recommended to "invest in data collection and evaluations, to ensure they will not be overlooked."
Over time, this Network is still not concerned that in Argentina there are 11 million people eating in soup kitchens, that is, depending on government programs.
One of the most interesting details of the 2018 report on Venezuela is the statement regarding "difficulties in paying the debt, which could lead to stricter economic sanctions for non-compliance, which would cause the collapse of the economy." and in this case, "the government had limited capacity to provide basic services." In other words, the "sanctions" were not unilateral coercive measures by the United States against Venezuela, not endorsed by the UN, but were justified for failing to pay the debt.
In 2019, Venezuela was re-incorporated, stating that it was among the undeclared countries with a food crisis in the report, due to lack of validated data, therefore, the need to campaign in favor of investments was again underlined in food safety measurement system at national and regional level.
Venezuela considered as a country of interest by the Global Network against Food Crisis in the GRCF 2019 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2019)
However, in this, Venezuela was identified as one of the countries in the world with "the highest number and proportion of the population in a situation of food insecurity in 2018" in Phase 3 of the CPI / CH Crisis or higher by three populations of Venezuelan migrants in Colombia , Ecuador and Peru that reached "0.4 million in South America", that is, 400 thousand people (0.3 in Colombia, 0.02 in Ecuador and 0.04 in Peru according to the database).
In particular, the 'economic shock', a category used for the first time in 2018 to define the driver of food insecurity in Burundi, was considered, among other things, by "trade restrictions imposed by neighboring countries, the United States and the EU with implications for all Burundians ", was precisely the one selected to consider the main driver of food insecurity in Phase 3 (CPI / CH crisis or higher) in Venezuela, although without mentioning the imposition of unilateral coercive measures or" sanctions "against the country as a driver of the economic shock, and justified because the migrants in Colombia, Ecuador and Peru "had exhausted their means to buy food."
In addition, based on the local organizations that carried out surveys in the country, mainly ENCOVI, they pointed to an increasingly serious humanitarian situation, however it was reaffirmed that "the number of people who needed urgent humanitarian assistance, were not clear due to the absence of reliable data until that moment ", although it was insisted that the deepening of the crisis was evident due to the increase in migration to other countries, mainly to Colombia."
And finally, they summarized that the drivers and risks of the number of people in Crisis or worse (CPI / CH Phase 3 or higher) in Venezuela were an 'economic shock' and another 'climate', related to the displacement of people with high probabilities that it would continue. worsening in the following 14 months, crowned by "the political stalemate" generated amid the declaration of Juan Guaidó as "interim leader" recognized by several countries, who "increased the pressure to support the self-proclaimed president."
Graphic representation of the drivers of 'acute' food insecurity in Venezuela according to the Global Network against Food Crises at GRCF 2019 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2019)
EVIDENCE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT: THE FOURTH MOST SERIOUS FOOD CRISIS IN THE WORLD
In April 2020, and as usual, Venezuela was again incorporated into the Global Report on Food Crises (GRFC), finding evidence from one year to the next and finally placing the country "as the fourth largest food crisis in the world. world with 9.3 million people in an 'acute' situation of food insecurity ", this would be with 32% of the population in Crisis or worse (Phase 3 of CPI / CH or higher), in a report with inconsistencies because, in On the other hand, you can read that there are 9.4 million. And it is that even for the construction of these publications it costs to agree, or rather it costs the consensus.
Venezuela considered as the world's food crisis by the Global Network against Food Crisis at GRCF 2020 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2020)
In this 2020 report , with data collected from July to September 2019, it is stated that "around 9.3 million people suffered from 'acute' food insecurity", and I transcribe verbatim: "of these, 2.4 million were considered in a situation of severe food insecurity and 7 million in moderate food insecurity ". Figures that when added do not yield the total reported data.
This number, the result of the CARI survey carried out by the WFP, published in February 2020, where it estimated "that 7.9% of the population of Venezuela (2.3 million) was in 'serious' food insecurity and 24 , An additional 4% (7 million) in moderate food insecurity ". A total of 32.3% of the population "in need of help".
And although 'acute' and chronic food insecurity is the one that is verified through the consensus of the Global Network to classify food crises, in this case Venezuela was taken from the total population identified in the survey, both in moderate insecurity and severe (acute) for Crisis or worse (IPC / CH Phase 3 or higher), and thus automatically making it one of the world's food crises and, at the same time, one of the worst; both for the first and only time.
Venezuela considered the fourth worst food crisis in the world by the Global Network against Food Crisis at GRCF 2020 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2020)
In addition, 1.2 million Venezuelan migrants were added between Colombia and Ecuador, being in the same situation in these countries. Indeed, it can be interpreted in the non-improvement of the quality of life of people who emigrate from the country and, therefore, as it is indeed happening, there is a reverse migration, since the beginning of the global pandemic by covid-19.
However, the story about the food crisis in Venezuela has been imposing itself politically, diplomatically and in the media, as outlined in " The construction of a food crisis in Venezuela (I) ", since 2015 and without verifiable data, until finally reaching multilateral organizations, especially the UN, where they seek to validate humanitarian interventions, and in this particular case under the R2P and hiding the geopolitical interests at stake.
In addition, in the Global Food Crisis Report (GRFC) 2020 it is constructed that in Venezuela there are an additional 17 million people, which would represent 60% of the population, in marginal food insecurity (CPI / CH Phase 2), imposing in total the 92% of the Venezuelan population within the country with food insufficiency. This would be only 8% not reached by this situation, around 2 million, according to their "calculations", where they assume that Venezuela has 28.5 million people.
Highlighted as an extraordinary event because it depicts a Venezuela, and this is reflected in their "calculations", with the highest percentage of the population in food insecurity in the world, even surpassing the extremely vulnerable populations of South Sudan (89 %), Yemen (83%), Afghanistan (68%), Haiti (66%), Syrian Arab Republic (50%) or Sudan (42%), positioning the country in a proportion that suggested the highest on the planet.
According to the World Network against Food Crises, in Venezuela, in 2019, 92% of the population suffered food insecurity, a proportion that suggested the highest on the planet (Photo: Alimentos y Poder)
All to justify the location of Venezuela as the "fourth largest food crisis", generated nothing more and nothing less than by an "economic shock" coincidentally, in the tone of Elliott Abrams, "caused by man." And only in a footnote you can read: "the economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela further limited export earnings and access to external financing."
However, in the general picture of malnutrition "in terms of Prevalence of Undernourishment were seven countries: South Sudan, Yemen, Central African Republic, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Syrian Arab Republic and Haiti, the main food crises in the world, each with more 35% of its population analyzed in Crisis or worse (IPC / CH Phase 3 or higher) ".
And if it does not seem an exaggeration to affirm that 92% of the Venezuelan population suffers from food insecurity, above other nations really affected by hunger, and in extreme conditions of conventional armed and open conflicts and natural disasters for decades, this Global Network Against Food Crisis "hopes that the economic difficulties will intensify on the Venezuelans who remain in the country," and with the pandemic in 2020, hunger will spread to 100% of the population.
The ultimate goal of this 2020 report is to lay the foundations on Venezuela as one of the worst food crises in the world, where urgent humanitarian assistance is required, inserting into the world imagination the need for "humanitarian" military intervention or R2P.
FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT: NO EVIDENCE
And since the GRFC report is published every year, in 2021 its fifth edition returned with which Venezuela continues to appear as a country of interest of this Global Network against Food Crisis, even when it is explained that "although the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was among the 10 worst food crises in 2019, there was not enough evidence to include it in 2020. "
But it continues to hint that "although the 'acute' food insecurity estimates for Venezuela are not included in the 2021 GRFC due to insufficient evidence (...) the data suggest that this major food crisis of 2019 'probably' worsened in 2020", still when it can be explicitly read that, "the existence of data gaps / insufficient evidence is reflected to produce estimates of people in Crisis or worse (CPI / CH Phase 3 or higher)". And not only in Venezuela: the evidence in the migrant population of Colombia, Ecuador and Peru disappeared from one year to the next.
In other words, they do not have, perhaps because they do not exist, the evidence to suggest that in Venezuela there was the fourth most serious food crisis in the world in 2019, and that from one year to the next it ceased to be so. An extraordinary luck that other countries have not had, as will be shown later.
And although it is reported in the 2021 GRFC that Venezuela was included only once from 2017 to 2021 as a world food crisis, and also considered one of the worst in the world, a position supposedly shared for the 'only time' with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Sierra Leone, the reality is that neither was shown as one of the worst food crises (even estimating the first 10.1 million people and the second 3.3 million in acute food insecurity, in the same 2020 report), as it did happen with Venezuela after having been selected regularly and year after year for inclusion.
However, the fact that there are "data gaps" and "lack of evidence" to continue promoting Venezuela as one of the worst food crises in the world does not prevent insisting that the "economic collapse, restrictions due to covid-19, insecurity and the climatic extremes fueled an already severe humanitarian crisis ", this being the ultimate goal: the construction of a story that facilitates military intervention as the last means to achieve the regime change proposed by the United States, endorsed by the European Union and the United Kingdom, Whatever her name is, and try dressing her up in different outfits.
And of course, the 2021 report cannot fail to refer to USAID's perspective regarding Venezuela and the worsening fuel shortages, in addition to the covid-19 that will "probably" limit the distribution of food and the access to markets, as well as expressing concern about the large influx of migrants returning to the alleged humanitarian crisis during the pandemic which, in any case, means less needy to justify donors interested in providing humanitarian aid for them abroad .
Agency of the United States that, apart from financing the reports of food crises year after year together with the European Union, donated 507 million dollars to attend the "humanitarian crisis" in Venezuela from 2017 to 2019, and as it has reported "aligned its award and decisions aimed at reinforcing the credibility of the provisional government of Juan Guaidó, "minimizing the delivery of funds to UN agencies with infrastructure in the country to deliver humanitarian products, because the" interim "was concerned about the support of the United Nations. United to the government of Nicolás Maduro.
Coming to finance only requests from Venezuelan NGOs that supported the interests of the foreign policy of the United States government in Venezuela, leading to the manipulation and use of humanitarian aid for political purposes, of whose donations only 2 million dollars were used to purchase and transport 368 million tons of humanitarian products, of which only 8 metric tons were delivered to the country as of August 2019.
WHY VENEZUELA AND NOT OTHER COUNTRIES IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN?
In 2021, " Hunger Hot Spots. FAO-WFP Early Alerts on Acute Food Insecurity. Outlook for March to July 2021 " was also published, stating that "the food security situation in Venezuela is likely to deteriorate even more as a result of hyperinflation, "that is, due to the economic shock, and for the first time the" tightening of international sanctions "is considered, although they do not refer to their unilateral coercive form, mainly by the United States.
In addition, in accordance with USAID's concern, they add "the impact of restrictions related to covid-19 and the shortage of fuel, affecting logistics and agricultural activities" that, although presented as independent variables, in Venezuela its impact is closely related to the imposition of the economic, financial and commercial blockade against the country, especially with regard to essential supplies such as energy.
And in this sense, Venezuela is again reflected, along with Syria, among the 23 countries with the highest number of people in a situation of 'acute' food insecurity in the world, even when the population is not considered in Crisis or worse (IPC / CH Phase 3 or higher), supported by the same CARI survey applied by WFP in 2019, with which the country was considered, a year earlier, as the fourth worst food crisis in the world.
Number of population in acute food insecurity in the world according to FAO and WFP (2021) where Venezuela appears, although no people are identified in CPI / CH Crisis Phase 3 or higher (Photo: FAO)
WFP that in 2021, in agreement with the national government , will focus attention on preschool and initial education schools to serve 185 thousand boys and girls in 2021, estimating to reach a total of 1.5 million schoolchildren by 2023, and among others invest in rehabilitation of canteens and training of personnel in food safety practices, adding this to the 18 food programs developed by the Bolivarian Revolution, and particularly through the School Food Program (PAE), which serves 5 million in schools 930 thousand students.
Therefore, apart from the analysis of the Global Food Crisis Reports from 2017 to 2021, due to their deep interest in warning of a possible famine in Venezuela, it is also necessary to point out the lack of it and of alarm for populations of other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean such as Argentina, Brazil or Mexico, which will be used only as an example because they are considered the main economies of the region and with larger populations, taking into account that smaller nations, although they have a high percentage of people in 'acute' food insecurity , by the proportion they will never be taken as the worst food crises, as long as it is measured by the number of people.
To do this, we use the Food Insecurity Prevalence of the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) applied by FAO since 2014 and, in a certain way, the CIF or IPC that determines food crises also benefits from this.
In 2021, FAO updated " The state of food security and nutrition in the world " that allows comparing some data that attracts powerfully attention, in terms of alerting possible food crises that are not monitored in terms of the number of people, since 2016, as is the case with Venezuela.
The first case is Argentina, which although it has an Undernourishment Prevalence Index (IPS) of 3.9%, the prevalence of moderate and severe food insecurity (FIES) reaches 35% of its population or 16 million people, being 5 , 7 million in serious conditions.
Even Brazil, whose IPS remains at less than 2.5%, according to the FIES, had in 2020 23.5% of its population in moderate and severe food insecurity, which is 49.6 million people; of these, 7.5 million in serious conditions. Both populations, of the two largest food producers in the world that, at the same time, cannot feed their entire population due to lack of availability and economic resources, that is, due to restricted access to food.
Mexico serves us as a third example, with an IPS by 2020 of 7.2%, indicating 9.2 million people in undernourishment or hunger, but if we review the prevalence of moderate and severe food insecurity from the FIES, it reaches 26.2 % or 33.2 million people; of these, 7.4 million in serious conditions.
So, if for Venezuela, according to the WFP (2019) there were 9.3 million people in moderate and severe food insecurity, of which 7 million were considered in moderate insecurity and 2.3 million in severe insecurity, it served as evidence when taking to the population identified in the survey for Crisis or worse (CPI / CH Phase 3 or higher) by the Global Food Crisis Network, and thus qualify the country as the fourth worst food crisis in the world, we would have to ask ourselves:
Why are 16 million people in Argentina, or 49.6 million in Brazil and 33.2 million in Mexico, do not generate alarm flashes or are they considered countries of interest, nor is food insecurity a cause for concern?
And we propose this simply because when Venezuela began to register an increase in IPS, reaching 3.1 million hungry people in 2017, according to FAO records, it was already considered a country of interest and cause for concern by the Network World Food Crisis.
Venezuela considered as a country of interest by the Global Network against Food Crises in the first edition of GRCF 2017 (Photo: FSIN - GRFC 2017)
WAS VENEZUELA THE FOURTH MOST SERIOUS FOOD CRISIS IN THE WORLD OR NOT?
In 2020, the FAO Food and Nutrition Security Outlook estimated the Prevalence of Undernourishment Index (IPS) for Venezuela at 31.4% in the 2017-2019 triennium, that is, 9.1 million hungry people by 2019, 300 thousand less than those considered in 'acute' food insecurity in the Global Report on Food Crisis, with which the country was declared the fourth worst food crisis in the world.
Likewise, the report made a projection for 2030 of 61.7% of the Venezuelan population with hunger, that is, 20.1 million people according to the IPS, which would imply the total population in catastrophic conditions of famine taking in consideration that the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity would also increase. And all for an economic shock.
On the other hand, the FAO in "The state of food security and nutrition in the world" (2021), in the following triennium 2018-2020 estimated an IPS of 27.4%, that is, that 7.8 million people are those who are undernourished in Venezuela, referring to a decrease in hunger by 1.3 million people by 2020 compared to 2019.
However, when we refer to the online publication of FAOSTAT (2021) , the IPS in the 2017-2019 triennium does not reach 31.4% of the population but 23.4%, that is, 6.8 million of people and not 9.1 million in 2019, nothing more and nothing less than 2.3 million fewer people, which also validated Venezuela as the fourth worst food crisis in the world.
And when reviewing the 2018-2020 triennium in the same portal, the IPS rises to 27.4% or 7.8 million people in undernourishment, and although the FAO constantly updates its data, what this latest publication refers to is that in Venezuela In 2019, it was classified as having a 'high' prevalence of undernourishment when it did not yet exist; It can even be added that the IPS in Venezuela did not reach 9.1 million people.
Prevalence Index of Undernourishment in Venezuela (2000-2020), according to FAOSTAT (2021) (Photo: Alimentos y Poder)
This raises an alert for the risk of manipulation of world food indicators, mainly by non-state actors, added to pressure from interested donors such as USAID, European Commission, Foreign & Commonwealth Office and others on multilateral organizations that require funding. .
Measurements that, even coming from 'reliable' sources, can serve as the table to validate "humanitarian interventions" or the R2P with hidden geopolitical interests, or even more so, when foreign interference is evident, particularly from the United States, supported by the European Union and the United Kingdom, to drown the Venezuelan economy and generate suffering in the population that contributed to achieving a change of regime or government under the umbrella and the discourse of the defense of human rights.
Alleged humanitarian interventions, of which there are many references in the world, that over time generally do not resolve humanitarian situations and the intervened territories are kept in worse or equal conditions than those found. To cite an example: Haiti, but it can be almost all countries considered the worst food crisis in the world from 2017 to 2021.
Therefore, although the increase in food insecurity in Venezuela is evident, whose growth has been proportional to the amount of "sanctions" and actions imposed by the United States, on the other hand it is logical to question the existence of the worst fourth food crisis in the world in the country during 2019, without evidence before or after; an extraordinary “luck” that, for example, entire countries or territories in armed conflicts or climatic shocks such as Yemen, Afghanistan, North or Northeast of Nigeria, Syrian Arab Republic, South Sudan, Sudan, Ethiopia, Malawi, have not counted on. Zimbabwe, Haiti, Mozambique, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia or Kenya, in which every year enough evidence is found to verify populations in 'acute' food insecurity
Countries considered the worst food crises in the world, at least once, and the estimate of the number of population verified in food insecurity in Crisis Phase 3 or higher of the CPI by the RGC from 2017-2021 (Photo: Food and Power)
Furthermore, if we use the Food Security Phase Integrated Classification Mapping Tool of the IPC Global Platform 2019-2021 on 'acute' food insecurity in the world, as well as the 2016-2021 series on the chronic food insecurity, the absence of Venezuela can be seen in the following maps.
Map of acute food insecurity in the world 2019-2021, according to IPC (Photo: IPC Global Platform (2021))
Map of chronic food insecurity in the world 2016-2021, according to IPC (Photo: IPC Global Platform (2021))
FINAL THOUGHTS
In 2021, the FAO again identified armed conflicts and climate variability and its extremes, definitely adding to economic slowdowns and recessions, as the main drivers of hunger in the world.
This third driver is the one that has been related in Venezuela, since 2015, to the increase in undernourishment and food insecurity, an 'economic shock' "caused by man", which finally FAO (2021) refers to "slowdowns and recessions regardless of whether they are driven by market swings, trade wars, political unrest or a global pandemic such as the one caused by COVID-19. "
Given this, FAO proposes actions to integrate humanitarian policies, increase climate resilience and those most vulnerable to economic adversity, intervene in supply chains, address poverty and inequalities through favorable interventions and strengthen food environments to improve patterns of consumption, etc.
But, will the FAO one day allow to denounce as an international organization that some actors pressure others to intervene diplomatically, economically, financially, commercially, politically and even in the media, damaging populations in the world that later the multilateral organization includes in its statistics to advocate for them humanely?
In the Venezuelan case, the systemic oil price crisis was evidently a means used by the United States to try to end Venezuela as a nation-state, through the imposition of unilateral coercive measures not endorsed by the UN, which over time They have shown that they violate the human rights of the entire population, through which no one is shot but generate a level of devastation depending on the severity and the application of the same in time and space to achieve the crushing of an economy, such as which war or bombardment with each "sanction" or action imposed.
"Sanctions" that since 2015 would be 352 bombs (only of the OFAC) falling on the Venezuelan territory consecutively. Another alert for the rest of the nations that still believes that an economic shock only occurred in Venezuela, coincidentally and coincidentally since the country was declared an unusual and extraordinary threat against the national security of the United States.
Economic shock driving food insecurity in the country, actually caused by the severity of unilaterally imposed "international sanctions", which can continue to be used disproportionately and as an effective means against any nation, whose damage can be equivalent to war for the destruction of infrastructure, although not instantaneously, causing suffering to the population and violating their rights to food, health, medicine, water, transportation and other services, which due to its systemic nature also violates the right to an alternative development of a country, whose actions to confront it are not only those proposed by FAO, it is not to expand and advocate for more humanitarian aid and resilience: it is to raise the voice so that all unilateral coercive measures are eliminated.
In other words, the blockade.
And since this form of unconventional warfare, protected by the economic, financial and commercial blockade, has been imposed on the Republic of Cuba for 60 years, spreading more and more to other nations and stealthily imposing itself in Venezuela since 2015, and in the face of such a forecast of the FAO for the Venezuelan population in the year 2030, in relation to food there is no other option than to overcome the conditions of vulnerability in this matter.
It means to overcome the configuration of the dependent Venezuelan agri-food system from a peripheral position subordinate to the world hegemonic power, and why not, to become a successful model of economic, political and cultural insubordination. Also of this there are examples counted in the world.
This article was originally published on the Food and Power website on August 4, 2021 .
https://misionverdad.com/investigacione ... nezuela-ii- WE ARE A GROUP OF INDEPENDENT RESEARCHERS DEDICATED TO ANALYZING THE WAR PROCESS AGAINST VENEZUELA AND ITS GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS. FROM THE BEGINNING OUR CONTENT HAS BEEN FREE TO USE. WE DEPEND ON DONATIONS AND COLLABORATIONS TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT, IF YOU WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO MISIÓN VERDAD YOU CAN DO IT HERE < https://misionverdad.com/donate
Google Translator