In a verge of a global restriction of food, I do not say nor higher prices, the “witch hunt” begins in the Western media. But the truth is that the fault is the arrogance and incompetence of the governments of North America and Europe, nothing more than that.
As the main media vehicles “have short memory”, we will use here their own articles of 2021.
The first article is from Reuters called: “China says it must consider food and energy security when curbing emissions”. On 24/10/2021, a week before the opening of COP 26, China announced to the world that food and energy security could not be behind climate targets:
“China should “manage the relationship between pollution reduction and carbon reduction and energy security, industrial supply chain security, food security and normal life of the people,” said a cabinet document published by official media Xinhua.
It also called for an effective response to the economic risks of green and low-carbon transition, to “prevent overreaction, and ensure safe carbon reduction”.”
On 07/29/2021, the same Reuters brought the following article: “China’s major fertiliser makers to suspend exports amid tight supplies”. That is, three months before the announcement of the official ban, signs about safety feeds were already being given.
On 10/19/2021, Bloomberg brought the following article: “China’s Curbs on Fertilizer Exports to Worsen Global Price Shock”, reporting that the Chinese government was asking for additional inspections on elitist exports and concerns about the effects of energy prices on fertilizer production.
In the Estoques de Petróleo EUA – EIA – Nº 42 (Portuguese only) report, we talk a lot about fertilizers and how 50% of global food production exists due to fertilizers linked to fossil fuels.
To close this “news session of the past”, the last one follows: “Fertilizer Exports from China Face Curbs, as Crop Acreage Levels Garners Attention”. This article is from Farm Policy News, directed to the local industry released on 10/05/2021.
Conclusion
Regardless of the Russia–Ukraine conflict, the reduction in global food production from 2022 was already contracted by mid-2021. In other words, the conflict has undoubtedly accelerated, but by no means was Russia solely responsible for this.
The most relevant question is exactly the opposite. Why, given this impending problem, did the governments of North America and Europe not take this into account when assessing the consequences of the conflict?
In terms of foreign policy, COP 26 made it clear to the world that for this group of countries – North America and Europe – the Energy Transition was the top priority of food and energy security.
That is, between 12/11/2021, closure of COP 26, and 11/01/2022, when the WEF released “Global Risks 2022: The ‘disorderly’ net-zero transition is here and it’s time to embrace it,” the message from NATO leaders (coincidence?) was clear: our priority is not food security, nor energy.
That said, I think it’s cynical that the same group of countries criticize others, such as India, who realize that food security is a priority. They did not correctly assess the consequences of the conflict in Europe for the rest of the world. To say that this food problem was not expected or that russia’s fault is of boundless hypocrisy.
Inflation in countries such as the US, Canada, and the EU (European community) is a consequence of their choices related to the energy transition. Could it have been avoided? Maybe not. Could it have been mitigated? Probably yes.
The negative consequences are coming. The leading politicians of these governments to political despair, which will make everything worse and probably lead us to even greater setbacks, as many of the measures taken in 2021 and 2022 in relation to the energy transition run the risk of being reversed or left in “limbo”. This may be the legacy of the Disorderly Transition, a setback.
Biden’s approval dips to lowest of presidency: AP-NORC poll
Germany: SPD suffers historic defeat in North Rhine-Westphalia
EU could combine tariffs on Russian oil with embargo, Yellen says
It is noteworthy that the consequences of the last article above can be catastrophic for the inflation, income, and fragmentation of the EU.
