SOUTHERN AFRICA: Genetically Modified Food Debate Erupts at UN

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Nov 13 2002 (IPS) - The storm surrounding genetically modified (GM) organisms has burst onto the scene at the United Nations, where the debate is focused on the use of genetically altered foods in providing relief to Southern African countries threatened by famine.

The U.S. representative before the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), Sichan Siv, this week exchanged some sharp words with the Human Rights Commission’s special rapporteur on the right to food, the Swiss-born Jean Ziegler, clearly marking their differences on the issue.

Most of the grain donations, mainly maize, that the United States sends to Southern Africa, are the product of genetically modified seeds.

Siv condemned Ziegler Monday for "challenging the food offered by the American people to avert the scourge of famine" and for "encouraging (African) governments to deny food to their hungry citizens."

An estimated 14 million people are in danger of starvation in Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

The special rapporteur responded: "The massive use of genetically modified organisms risks making rural users of such food dependent on multinational corporations which produce and sell such food."

Ziegler said Tuesday he has "no doubt of the grave and immediate threat posed by famine for more than 14 million inhabitants of Southern Africa, nor of the generosity of the government of the United States in donating essential provisions."

The human rights rapporteur defends the "principle of precaution", arguing that genetically modified organisms "can pose dangers in the medium and long term for human beings and for public health."

He admits, however, that the international scientific community is deeply divided on this question.

The precautionary principle is applied mainly to trade-related environmental matters to prevent exchange of questionable goods that might endanger the human population, flora and fauna or the ecological balance in general.

Ziegler noted that several European and developing countries, and a majority of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and rural movements – notably Via Campesina, Brazil’s MST (landless movement) and Federation Paysanne of France – "continue to oppose the introduction of genetically modified organisms into the food chain."

"The argument that genetically modified produce is indispensable for conquering malnutrition and hunger is not convincing," said the Human Rights rapporteur.

But Siv pointed out that the grains in question "have been consumed by millions of Americans, Canadians, Australians, South Africans and others all over the world for years, with not one known case of any apparent ill effect."

The U.S. diplomat based his comments on statements issued in August by the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP).

These three UN agencies agreed that consumption of the genetically modified food being distributed in Southern Africa "is not likely to present a human health risk."

On this point in the debate, the spokesman for the WFP in Geneva, Christiane Berthiaume spoke up, charging that Ziegler does not have the adequate background to comment on the matter. "He is not a scientist," she said.

Siv cited WHO director-general Gro Harlem Brundtland, who told a recent meeting of African health ministers: "We know, for example, that GM foods are eaten by people in other regions. These foods are no less safe for people here in Africa than they are for people who eat them in other parts of the world."

The U.S. diplomat said he supports Brundtland’s counsel that the African countries "must consider carefully the severe and immediate consequences of limiting the food aid that is made available for the millions of people so desperately in need."

But his most scathing comment was aimed directly at rapporteur Ziegler, "Actions have consequences, and your actions can cause people to die."

Ziegler had his defence ready, citing the FAO’s own figures that 815 million people are currently seriously and chronically undernourished, but underlining that FAO director-general Jacques Diouf has said "there are sufficient supplies of non-modified food to feed this population."

The initial reactions of the non-governmental organisations (NGOs) specialising in the issue of genetically modified foods were in support of Ziegler.

Cecilia Oh, of the Third World Network (TWN), an international organisation based in Penang, Malaysia, commented that the U.S. position "is tantamount to blackmail of people already in crisis. It is also a blatant promotion of corporate interests."

She expressed her agreement with the special rapporteur, saying, "He is correct to highlight the need for the precautionary principle to be applied."

There is indeed enough scientific evidence to suggest that genetically modified food is unsafe, said the TWN representative.

Human Rights rapporteur Ziegler further noted, "Among the 1.2 billion persons in the world suffering from extreme poverty, according to the statistics of the World Bank, 75 percent are subsistence farmers… The extensive use of genetically modified organisms risks aggravating their misery."

A group of NGOs, including the Third World Network, wrote an open letter to the UN agencies and to the U.S. government two months ago, criticising the latter’s "unrelenting pressure" on Southern African countries to accept genetically modified food "in the form of food aid and through credit assistance."

The groups said they "support the position of the Zambian government, which has taken a strong stand – with the support of its people and following a national consultation process – to reject GM food aid."

The letter applauds the fact that Zambia employed the precautionary principle, and notes that the decision was taken "to protect Zambian agriculture production and prospects for exports."

The country’s government has taken steps to ensure that adequate food supplies are available, and several nations – Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, China and India – have stepped in to provide non-GM maize.

The signatories of the open letter to Washington, WHO, FAO and WFP, were the Friends of the Earth, of Malaysia, Nigeria, Uruguay and Norway; Konphalindo, of Indonesia; Tebtebba Foundation, Philippines; and Acción Ecológica of Ecuador.

The list also includes Britain’s Institute of Science in Society, ECOROPA Europe and, from the United States, the Edmonds Institute and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.