Recently, the global food market has once again become a hot topic. Especially while we are still worried about the decline in rice production due to India's extreme weather, an even bigger shadow looms over us – the issue of food hegemony. The United States, as a global agricultural power, has always touched the nerves of the world in its actions in the international grain market. But you know what? The story behind America's food hegemony is far more complicated than you might think. How do they control the world through food, and what are the political and economic calculations behind this? Let's find out.
The United States has long been one of the world's leading producers of grain, and its fertile land and advanced agricultural technology have made it an important pillar of the global food supply. The story behind this is not simple. Since the beginning of the 20th century, the United States has vigorously developed its agricultural industry through a series of agricultural policies, which not only ensures domestic food safety, but also gives it enough voice in the world.
In the 1930s, the U.S. government began to implement various agricultural subsidy policies in order to incentivize farmers to grow more food. These policies not only guaranteed the basic income of farmers in the event of natural disasters such as droughts and floods, but also stimulated a substantial increase in agricultural production. By 1987, U.S. agricultural subsidies had risen from less than $5 billion to $15 billion. The direct effect of this policy is that the peasants in the United States are more motivated to produce and the grain output is also rising.
The increase in food production has brought with it a new problem - the oversupply of food on the market. In order to solve this problem, the U.S. government enacted the Agricultural Trade and Development Act, which exported surplus grain abroad through foreign aid, which not only stabilized the domestic market, but also expanded its international influence through food aid. U.S. food aid is not gratuitous, and every aid has its own political purpose, especially during the Cold War, when countering Soviet influence through food aid was an important diplomatic tool for the United States.
The United States is also exerting its influence as a food power in the international market. In 1963, the United States sold 4 million tons of flour and wheat to the Soviet Union, which not only marked the first cooperation between the two great powers, but also demonstrated the ability of the United States to use grain as a political and economic tool. Over time, the United States has established an informal "food cartel" with other major grain exporting countries, such as Australia and Canada, to influence the global food market by controlling food prices and export policies.
The impact of food hegemony is far-reaching, and since the 50s of the 20th century, the United States has begun to use its food superiority against geopolitical opponents. For example, the Soviet Union had to turn to the United States for help during the Khrushov period because of domestic food shortages. The United States took advantage of this opportunity, by providing food aid, in fact deepening the dependence of the Soviet Union, which to some extent affected the international balance of power during the Cold War.
In the 21st century, as globalization accelerates, so does America's food strategy. Now, it's not just about expanding its impact through direct food aid, it's about controlling the entire chain from seed research and development, fertilizer production, to the processing and marketing of agricultural products, through global value chains. This control has allowed the United States to have a say in global food security issues, while also making developing countries more dependent on international markets for food supplies.
For example, through the promotion of genetically modified technology and patented seeds, several major agricultural companies in the United States, such as Monsanto and DuPont, have formed a monopoly on seed supply on a global scale. Not only does this make farmers in these countries dependent on U.S. agricultural technology, but it also puts them at greater risk of loss in the face of market volatility and climate change.
The United States has used its influence in international trade organizations to push for free trade agreements, which often include provisions that favor U.S. agricultural exports. In this way, the United States is able to ensure a competitive advantage in the global market for its agricultural products, while suppressing the ability of other countries to develop their own agricultural capacity.
But there are risks behind this strategy. Import-dependent countries are even more vulnerable to climate anomalies and political instability as they are today. The risk of relying on a single supplier has been repeatedly demonstrated in recent global events, whether it is a trade war or a pandemic lockdown, which has seriously affected the stable supply of food.
Food is not just a commodity, it is related to the basis of the survival of hundreds of millions of people. Can this power be abused when one country has too much control over the global food supply? Can food security in the era of globalization really be maintained by the goodwill of a few major powers? This is a question that deserves deep consideration by all countries.
By understanding the history and strategy of food hegemony in the United States, we can see that as a basic need for life, there are complex international political and economic interests hidden behind it. The United States has ensured its dominance of the global food market through a variety of strategies, but this control also poses a potential threat to the food security of other countries. In today's increasingly globalized world, countries need to find a balance to ensure that food supplies are diversified and secure, and that risks are not controlled by a single economy. This is not only a strategic adjustment at the national level, but also a challenge faced by all of humanity.