On global Food Security in the context of unilateral coercive measures

Ensuring food security, eliminating hunger, promoting sustainable development of agriculture and increasing its production potential are becoming particularly relevant today.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimates that about 690 million people, or 8.9 percent of the world's population, suffer from hunger, an increase of 10 million people in one year and almost 60 million in five years.

A similar upward trend is observed in the prevalence of acute food insecurity, which also reflects the extent of hunger.

Three billion people – almost 40 percent of the world's population do not have access to adequate nutrition. The economic consequences of COVID-19 have worsened the already difficult situation in the food sector – an additional 140 million people faced food shortages.

This threatens the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The world is behind schedule in achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 “Eliminating hunger”. If trends continue, the number of people suffering from hunger will exceed 840 million by 2030.

According to FAO, in September 2021, the average value of the FAO Food Price Index was 130.0 points, which is 32.8 percent higher than in September last year. The increase in the Index value in September was mainly due to an increase in prices for most cereals and vegetable oils. According to the FAO forecast, despite reaching a historical maximum, the volume of grain production in the world in 2021 will be below the level of consumption.

According to the estimates of the UN agencies, published on October 4, 2021., currently, the world is facing an unprecedented catastrophic level of food insecurity, and about 6.6 billion US dollars are urgently needed to support 41 million people who are at risk of hunger.

Belarus has always made a significant contribution to ensuring global food security. Our country exports agricultural products and foodstuffs to more than 100 countries of the world. However, the thoughtless sanctions pressure of Western countries on Belarus threatens not even our country, but global food security. In the context of the coronavirus pandemic, the results of the sanctions policy acquire far from rosy prospects in the field of development and the fight against hunger in the world.

There is a direct relationship between the sectoral sanctions of the European Union and other countries against the potash industry of Belarus with increasing food risks around the world, the threat of a food crisis. Obviously, taking into account the share of Belarus in the world market of potash fertilizers (20%), the ban on their export will lead (and already leads) to an increase in the cost of both fertilizers and food products, which contributes to an increase in the number of hungry people on the planet. And it's not just our estimates. Similar conclusions are drawn by the UN, FAO and a number of international companies and associations in the field of trade in potash fertilizers and food. In this regard, the question arises: are the countries imposing sanctions against the potash industry of Belarus aware of this real threat to the whole world, or do they prefer not to notice this threat in order to achieve some ephemeral goals, increasing sanctions pressure on Belarus?

In September this year, on the sidelines of the 76th Session of the UN General Assembly, the UN Secretary-General convened a Summit on Food Systems, following which states promised to continue efforts to eliminate hunger and make healthy food more affordable. At the same time, it was noted that the solution to the problem of hunger is impossible without ensuring access of agricultural producers to fertilizers in the required quantity and at an affordable price for them.

In the spirit of the Declaration of the World Summit on Food Security, Belarus calls for the abandonment of the application of sanctions, which not only contradict international obligations, including in the framework of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, but also run counter to the provisions of the UN Charter and resolutions of the UN General Assembly on unilateral coercive measures.

Print version