| Bobo's presentation outlines which countries around the world allow and grow genetically engineered crops. He also shows a map of countries that fall into each of the following stages of GMO legalization: "Granting Production & Import Approvals, Conducting Pre-Commercial Field Trials, Granting Import Approvals, and Commercialization Delayed."
The State Department's role, he says, "Covers all trade issues related to biotechnology" and "Covers food aid/development issues involving biotechnology." State coordinates with the USDA, FDA, EPA, President, USAID, and Dept of Commerce on these issues. (USAID, by the way, is an agency within the State Dept.) Their goals are to: "Promote science-based regulatory systems, Maintain flow of trade while ensuring health and environmental safety of products, [and] Reduce hunger and poverty and increase incomes in developing world."
And, yes, the State Department had, at the time of this presentation (it has no date, but is from some time after 2004), $500,000 in "Biotech Outreach Funds" to spend on speakers, workshops, translation, and the U.S. website.
Another document I found, a job description for state department interns, says the following:
The Agriculture and Biotech Trade Affairs (ABT) division of the Office of Multilateral Trade and Agriculture Affairs (MTAA) seeks to open markets to U.S. agricultural products and to eliminate barriers to such trade. ABT works to advance the State Department's critical global food security goals and policies that alleviate the problems associated with rising global food prices. The ABT team contributes to the development of effective food aid policies, and promotes rural development and increasing agricultural productivity through the application of appropriate technologies, including biotechnology. ABT oversees the distribution of the Department's biotech outreach funds to promote international acceptance of biotechnology.
Interesting, huh? In one leaked memo from Romania, "DOS Senior Advisor for Biotechnology Jack Bobo visited Romania to meet with new Romanian government officials to advocate for the benefits of agricultural biotechnology." During this trip:
Mr. Bobo also met with industry representatives from Monsanto and Syngenta (he had met with a Pioneer representative during his prior stop in Hungary). The industry officials noted that anti-biotech EU member states, particularly France, are lobbying the GOR [Govt of Romania] to change its position on biotechnology. The representatives agreed that organizing a group of pro-biotech supporters would be beneficial and could help support Romania and other newer EU member states to exchange experiences with more developed countries such as Spain, thereby banding their voices together in dealings with the Commission.
Another cable from Thailand describes the U.S. embassy in Thailand's request for $20,000 in Biotech Outreach Funds in 2010 to "support a workshop on the intersection of biotechnology, food security, rice production and the four lower Mekong countries [Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam]." The memo goes on to say:
As insecticide use in rice fields is extensive in some lower Mekong areas, such as the Mekong delta, the environmental benefits of GMOs could bring important allies from environment officials. With rice and other crop production a key element for the four nations, and the great promise that GMOs hold for rice production in the face of climate change, an outreach event that draws together these four countries, food security, rice and the environment in the context of science and biotechnology is a natural fit.
The $20,000 in outreach funds would go for the following proposed two-day conference:
Embassy Bangkok, in collaboration with FAS, USAID/RDMA, Embassies Vientiane, Phnom Phen and Hanoi would hold a conference on "Agricultural Production, Climate Change and Biotechnology" for two days in the spring of 2010. The conference would review climate change predictions for rice and other crop production in the various aspects of rice farming - dry and wet season, rice paddy and dry land. Another presentation would relate rice and other crop production to food security for Asia. Another would review how manmade water management - irrigation diversions, canals, dykes and hydropower dams, will affect rice production. The conference would then move into the state of biotechnology for rice production in the U.S. and China, what biotech could offer for rice producers, and what the actual state of play is for rice biotech exports to, for example, Europe under WTO rules. Targeted participants would be a mix of scientists and government officials, the latter a mix of environment, water management, trade and agriculture officials.
This is not the only example of U.S. funds working to promote biotech. Another cable, from Mozambique, notes the use of "USDA Emerging Markets Program funding" to send "three Mozambicans in an agricultural biotechnology informational tour of the United States in November 2009." Yet another cable from Mozambique discusses a proposal for Biotech Outreach Funds "to bring two experts in the subject matter to South Africa to meet with regulators, academia, consumers, and legislators on currently relevant topics such as regulation of stacked genes, low level presence and labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMO) on foods, and liability and redress."
Another cable requesting Biotech Outreach Funds comes from Tunisia, proposing a workshop to address the following:
With growing population pressure and limited farm lands, Tunisia's food security is increasingly threatened by irregularity of rainfall. The proposed workshop would address the advantages of agricultural biotechnology in arid and semi-arid regions, including positive effects on crops yields, biotechnology's impact on biodiversity and the environment, and direct socio-economic benefits to Tunisian farmers from the use of biotechnology in agriculture.
Lovely, huh? |
