Apart from the war in Ukraine, where the violent fighting that is taking place in Severodonetsk could mean a major turn in the war scenario, and where the role of oligarchs in post-conflict Ukraine may be concerned, this new edition of the Diary of Ideas highlights the following topics. First of all, the relations between the United States and China with both statements by the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the reply from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at a time when both powers are immersed in a race diplomatic to extend its influence to the South Pacific. We also pay special attention to South America, where for the first time a left-wing candidate has a chance of winning the presidential election in Colombia, shortly after the holding of the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles with the ultimate goal of advancing integration with a view to a sustainable, resilient and equitable future. Other relevant issues in this edition are: the decision of Denmark to integrate into the security and defense policy of the EU, the delicate situation of the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson who has just overcome a motion of confidence presented by his own deputies, the declining democratic quality in the world and the dangers of the current biases of Artificial Intelligence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As for the war in Ukraine, Ben Hall and Roman Olearchyk warn in the Financial Times<\/em><\/a> of the danger that Ukrainian oligarchs may pose in the current war context. The powerful Ukrainian executives and oligarchs, who in 2014 with Putin’s offensive that ended the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and part of the eastern Donbass region played a very important role in Ukrainian politics, are completely missing and their political and media influence has diminished enormously. In 2014, the Ukrainian business elite funded battalions of foreign volunteers and some were appointed governors in areas such as Ihor Kolomoisky who was appointed governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region, Serhiy Taruta, steel magnate, appointed governor of the Donetsk region and Oleksander Yaroslavsky, mayor of Kharkiv, the second largest city in the country. Eight years later, with a much better prepared Ukrainian army with the help of the United States and part of NATO, these oligarchs mainly focus on financing the war. However, the authors point out that it is likely that these oligarchs will return to the forefront and increase their wealth with the reconstruction of the country after the war, thanks to the millionaire contributions of the West.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, from the pages of The Guardian<\/em><\/a>, J\u00fcrgen Stock, secretary general of Interpol, warns of another danger for post-conflict Ukraine: the possibility that the weapons sent after the Russian invasion end up in the shadow economy and in the hands of criminals. Stock recommends that arms-exporting countries cooperate with Interpol’s control operations, since criminal groups will try to exploit the chaotic situation and the availability of a huge number of weapons available on the black market. He stresses that this has already happened in Afghanistan, where large amounts of weapons and sophisticated equipment were abandoned and fell into the hands of terrorist groups and the Taliban.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ana Pouvreau also points out in the magazine Conflits<\/em><\/a> that endemic corruption, which has affected Ukraine’s development prospects since its independence in 1991, raises questions about the high risk of massive financial aid being diverted to corrupt individuals and powerful criminal networks. Shortly before the war, both the international community and the Ukrainian citizenry were unanimous in their condemnation of corruption in the country. In 2020, according to the NGO Transparency International, Ukraine shared the same corruption perception index as Zambia or Sierra Leone. Besides, in 2021, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) deplored, in a report titled Reducing Grand Corruption in Ukraine, that EU action for reform in Ukraine had been ineffective in combating this scourge. The report notes that tens of billions of euros go missing every year due to corruption, illicit financial flows and money laundering. It also warns that corruption is endemic and hinders competition and growth, as well as undermining the country’s democratic process. The ECT also warns of the connections between oligarchs, high officials, political leaders, the judicial system and public companies and laments the failure of the EU to develop a genuine strategy aimed at combating grand corruption. However, without any guarantee that the released funds will be used as intended, the West has announced financial aid not seen since World War II. In the case of the United States, $40 billion, higher than Cameroon’s GDP; the G7, $19.8 billion; the EU, 10 billion euros for refugees in April 2022 and 6 billion euros for reconstruction aid in May 2022; France, 300 million euros; the IMF, 1,400 million euros of emergency aid. On May 18, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced her plan to co-borrow from EU states, inspired by the post-COVID recovery plan, to finance the reconstruction of Ukraine and the establishment of a new financial instrument called RebuildUkraine<\/em>, supported by the European budget. Finally, the funds made available to Ukraine by Western leaders despite the systemic corruption that has existed for several decades, carries a great risk of strengthening the position of certain oligarchs who, however, are responsible for much of the systemic problems of the country, as well as that of criminal networks, thus endangering the future of the Ukrainian people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is happening in a context in which, despite the progressive increase and tightening of sanctions, there is no indication that Russia is going to withdraw from Ukraine. This is no surprise, given that the sanctions have had the perverse effect of raising the cost of Russia’s oil and gas exports, thereby dramatically increasing its trade balance and financing its militaristic efforts. Larry Elliott points out in The Guardian<\/em><\/a> that, during the first four months of 2022, Russia has a current account surplus of 96,000 million dollars, more than triple that in the same period of 2021. In addition, Russia has no difficulty finding markets alternatives for its energy. For example, its oil and gas exports to China in April increased by more than 50% year-on-year. As a complement. Aisha Majid reports to The New Statesman<\/em><\/a> on the growth of Russian oil exports since the start of the invasion and states that the war itself appears to be reshaping global oil markets. In the last quarter of 2021, about 95% of Russian oil exported through the Arctic, Baltic and Black seas stayed in Europe. However, in April and May of this year this percentage fell to 59%, according to the think tank Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air<\/a>, although Russia has continued to export more than 30,000 million euros of oil in the countries of the EU since the beginning of the invasion. By contrast, Western economies face a period of slow or negative growth and rising inflation. Central banks feel that they must respond to rampant inflation by raising interest rates and unemployment will rise. On the other hand, the problems faced by the poorest countries are of a different order of magnitude. For some of them, the problem does not stem from economic stagnation, but hunger, as a result of the blockade of wheat supplies from Black Sea ports. Putin will not surrender without any condition. The potential collateral damage of economic warfare is clear: falling living standards in developed countries; famine, food riots and a debt crisis in the developing world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding global affairs, in an interview in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a>, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken gives his insight into several current issues from the perspective of US foreign policy: the war in Ukraine, the global food crisis, the America’s relationship with China and, finally, the relationship with Saudi Arabia. The Secretary of State affirms that, long before Putin began the offensive on the Ukrainian border on February 24, the Biden Administration was very clear that its intervention in the conflict would be solely to defend the security and independence of the Ukrainians and not to declare war on Russia. On the global food crisis caused by climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic and the invasion of Ukraine, Blinken affirms that the priority purpose of US foreign policy is to help the most needy countries through technical and economic assistance. Regarding relations with China, the Secretary of State warns of China’s intentions to end the current world order and establish an illiberal one in the long term. He says that if the United States cannot change Beijing’s plans, it will be able to influence them through cooperation with other European and Asian countries and by establishing a common strategy. Lastly, regarding relations with Saudi Arabia, Blinken points out that, after eight years of war in Yemen, a ceasefire arrived for the first time, and that the US is confident that it can improve its relations, as well as with the United Arab Emirates. United States, two key players in the conflicts with China and Russia and the supply of energy to Europe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For his part, the spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Wang Wenbin, responds in Le Grand Continent<\/em><\/a> to the Blinken doctrine and considers that the US is aiming to interfere in Chinese internal affairs and defame the country’s foreign policy, with a prospective on maintaining American hegemony and power. Likewise, the spokesman warns that Taiwan, Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Tibet are China’s internal affairs and insists that resolving the Taiwan question and achieving the complete reunification of the country is the common aspiration and firm will of all and every Chinese. Therefore, China has no room for compromise. Finally, he denounces that the United States raises the concept of competition, but what they are really doing is overgeneralizing about national security, engaging in illegal unilateral sanctions and long-term decisions, which seriously harm the rights and interests of legitimate Chinese companies. Besides, this also deprives unfairly to other countries of their right to development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Keeping up with relations between the US and China, Katie Stallard analyzes The New Statesman<\/em><\/a> the diplomatic career that both superpowers are leading in the islands of the South Pacific. In a political context where many Western analysts predict a new Cold War between the United States and China, the states of the South Pacific Ocean have become the focus. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi traveled to the Fiji Islands with the intention of holding a summit with the foreign ministers of the Pacific Islands and discussing an economic and security agreement with them. The response from Australia, an American ally, was swift, and the new Foreign Minister traveled to the capital of Fiji with the intention of frustrating that pact. Over the last decade, China has provided a lot of economic aid and increased ties with countries in the region: thus, for example, the trade value between the Pacific islands and China surpassed Australia as early as 2013, and imports and The Asian superpower’s exports to the Solomon Islands account for 46% of the country’s total trade. Last April, both countries signed an agreement that allows China to send its security forces to the Solomon Islands and use its ports, and everything indicates that China intends to sign the same type of agreement with Kiribati, Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea and East Timor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another prominent issue is the possible victory of left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro in the second round of Colombia’s presidential elections. Olga L. Gonz\u00e1lez analyzes his possibilities in CTXT<\/em><\/a>. Gustavo Petro, president of the Historical Pact coalition, is the first left-wing candidate to win a first round of presidential elections in Colombia, with 40% of the vote. On June 19, he will face the candidate of the League of Anticorruption Governors, Rodolfo Hern\u00e1ndez, who has the support of the right and the traditionalist extreme right, in the second round. Gustavo Petro was a guerrilla member of the April 19 Movement (M19), a guerrilla formed by former members of the FARC. After M19 signed peace in 1991, Petro entered political life as a deputy of the Assembly in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Between 2012 and 2015, he was mayor of Bogot\u00e1, until a controversial court decision replaced him. In 2018, he ran for president but Ivan Duque won the battle. However, the current context is very different from that of the last elections. First, Ivan Duque’s party has lost a lot of prestige among the Colombian electorate. Second, the electoral proposals against the FARC (which used to be a very important campaign claim) are no longer so strong, especially after the peace agreement in 2016. Third, Colombians have discovered mobilization and social protest, especially on the part of of the youngest. Finally, the serious consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colombia and the violence in the country have contributed to strengthening Petro’s candidacy. The main points of the Historical Pact program are progressive tax reform, strengthening the public health system, protecting national industry, developing a program for ecological transition and strengthening tourism in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Also in Latin America, Miguel Gonz\u00e1lez Palacios analyzes in Open Democracy<\/em><\/a> the Summit of the Americas held in Los Angeles from June 6 to 9 and highlights that the outlook does not seem very favorable for achieving the declared objective of advancing integration with a view to a sustainable, resilient and equitable future. In turn, the summit has been a crucial stage for the Biden administration to fulfill the promise of resuming its country’s leadership in multilateral spaces, and to recover the ground lost in recent years to China, Russia and other actors. Global companies in their \u201cbackyard\u201d. On the other hand, in the midst of a complicated situation and a crisis of multilateralism at the regional and global levels, the summit dealt with urgent issues that require coordinated action among the countries of the region. For example, the climate emergency, the migration crisis, the health cooperation and economic and social recovery from the ravages left by the COVID-19 pandemic, along with the global geopolitical realignment that the war in Ukraine entails.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The political scientist Marc Sanjaume highlights in P\u00fablico<\/em><\/a> the lessons that European sovereignties can learn from the political evolution of Quebec over the last decades. Elections for the National Assembly will be held next October and the polls predict, on the one hand, an overwhelming victory for conservative autonomist nationalism led by current Prime Minister Fran\u00e7ois Legault and, on the other, the disappearance of the Party Qu\u00e9bec (PQ), which would become an extra-parliamentary force half a century after its founding in 1968. Sanjaume points out that, despite everything, the PQ has achieved several historical objectives of Quebec sovereignty. At the institutional level, Quebec has achieved remarkable levels of self-government. From the political articulation of the sovereignty movement in the 1960s to the officialization of the French language, including the French immersion schooling model (imported in Catalonia in 1983), we can also highlight: a self-managed pension system, the selection of the majority of immigration and asylum claims, a notable network of foreign representation with its own representation in UNESCO, a provincial referendum law, diverse institutional asymmetries and a singular degree of territorial and energetic development through institutions and provincial companies, among others. Quebec, nowadays, is a nation that simply would not exist as we know it without the profound impact of the PQ. It is not a question, therefore, of rejecting the Qu\u00e9bec experience for its failures, just as its achievements in terms of language policy, federal accommodation or foreign policy were embraced in its day, but of understanding its global evolution and drawing the conclusions that are considered appropriate. For sovereignties around the world, Quebec can continue to be a benchmark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a European key, Eline Schaart underlines in Politico<\/em><\/a> that Denmark voted overwhelmingly at the end of May in favor of integration in the security policy and defends the EU in a historic referendum triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine where almost 67% voted for him. The decision had the support of the Social Democratic government and nine other parties, and only three parties remained outside the consensus, two on the extreme right and one on the extreme left. The measure represents a break with the historical Danish skepticism regarding greater European integration. Although Denmark is a strong supporter of the single market and greater economic cooperation, the country had always been highly skeptical of EU decision-making, voting in two previous referendums to keep the single currency exclusion in place, justice and internal affairs. This decision means that Denmark will be able to participate in joint EU military operations and cooperate in the development and acquisition of military capabilities within the EU. It is not yet clear in which of the seven ongoing EU military missions Denmark will have a participation. However, during the election campaign, various parties that have been supporting the ‘Yes’ have said that, among the missions in which Denmark could participate, we find the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the anti-piracy mission off the coast of Somalia. Apart from the referendum, the government and the main parliamentary parties have also agreed to increase Denmark’s defense budget to 2% of GDP in 2033, in line with NATO’s spending target.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tom McTague comments in The Atlantic<\/em><\/a> that, after months of political upheaval in the UK over Boris Johnson’s behavior, many of his co-religionists Conservatives in Parliament decided to present a formal vote of confidence that Johnson ended up winning by 211 votes against 148. It is relevant to point out the fact that he became the first sitting British Prime Minister to be fined for breaking the law. If he had lost, the process to replace him as party leader \u2014and prime minister\u2014 would have started immediately, thus becoming the sixth leader British in just 15 years, demonstrating a period of significant political instability. Nevertheless, Johnson’s reaction has not been long in coming and the British government has just presented Parliament with a bill<\/a> that intends to reverse parts of the protocol signed with the European Union on Northern Ireland that is part of the Brexit agreement. Among the measures, Boris Johnson’s executive seeks to end the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) over disputes relating to Northern Ireland. In addition, the rule includes the intention that companies that trade only with Northern Ireland can choose whether to abide by the Community or British regulation, and proposes to apply in this territory subsidies and tax relief in force in the rest of the British territory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding the future of the European Union when the war in Ukraine ends that is currently in construction, The Economist<\/em><\/a> underlines that despite the differences between countries, for the moment the unity regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war still resists. However, with the beginning of the Russian invasion in Ukraine, the main rift has been between the countries of the East with respect to those of the West. Poland, especially, and the Baltic States, fear that any outcome other than an unequivocal defeat for Putin will encourage an invasion later on. Instead, Emmanuel Macron, Olaf Scholz and Mario Dragui prefer not to make any hasty decisions against Russia and continue to open the channel of communication with Putin. Despite these divergences, at the fourth summit since the war began, European leaders agreed to strengthen sanctions against Russia, such as an embargo on most imports of Russian crude oil, and decided to allocate a new package of nine billion euros for the Ukrainian army.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding the health of democracy, Toby James and Holly Ann Garnett analyze in The Conversation<\/em><\/a> a report<\/a> by the Electoral Integrity Report think tank that presents a global assessment of the quality of elections around the world in the period between 2012 in the 2021, based on nearly 500 elections in 170 countries. The report reveals that the United States is the lowest liberal democracy on the list, ranking only 15th out of 29 states in the Americas, behind Costa Rica, Brazil, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States. 75th place in the general classification. As for the reasons that explain this low result, the authors point out that elections with disputed results have a lower score in the classification because a key part of democracy lies in the peaceful transition of power through results that are mostly accepted. In the case of the US, Trump’s comments after his defeat caused his supporters to storm the Capitol and cast doubt on the legitimacy of the result in much of America. This illustrates that electoral integrity is not just about designing laws, but also depends on candidates and supporters acting responsibly throughout the electoral process. However, the problems with US elections run much deeper. As the report discloses, the drawing up of electoral constituencies in the US is one of the main shortcomings, as they have a long history of gerrymandering, where districts are delimited so that the populations that are most likely to vote for a given political party are included in a given constituency. Voter and ballot box registration is another problem. Some US states have recently implemented laws that make it more difficult to vote, such as requiring an identity document, raising concerns about the effect this will have on turnout. We already know that the costs, time and complexity of completing the DNI process, together with the added difficulties for people with high residential mobility or insecure housing situations, make it even less likely that underrepresented groups will participate in the elections. In general terms, Finland, Sweden and Denmark lead the ranking, while Cape Verde has the highest quality of electoral integrity in Africa. Taiwan, Canada and New Zealand rank first for their respective continents. Finally, electoral integrity in Russia has seen a further decline following the 2021 parliamentary elections. A pre-election report warned of intimidation and violence against journalists, and that the media largely promote the policies of the current government. Only Belarus ranks lower in Europe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Economist<\/em><\/a>, for its part, points to the COVID-19 pandemic as one of the factors that has accelerated the decline of the rule of law, based on data from the Rule of Law Index<\/a> prepared by the World Justice Project, which has been published annually since 2009 and covers 140 countries. Thus, a few weeks after the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic in March 2020; at least 84 countries declared a state of emergency and, by September, 146 had introduced measures that affected human and civil rights. Although states of emergency have been lifted in most countries, many still face some restrictions, as authoritarian governments are particularly reluctant to lift states of emergency, as in Hungary, for example, where Viktor Orb\u00e1n has replaced to the state of emergency COVID-19 for a state of emergency for the war in Ukraine. Also, still in Hong Kong: the annual meeting to commemorate the June 4 massacre in Beijing in 1989 has been banned for the third consecutive year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the economic field, the editorial of the daily Le Monde<\/em><\/a> praises the pragmatism that the European institutions have shown in relation to the stability pact. The budgetary discipline rules to which the EU member states are subject have been suspended until 2023. This new flexibility can only be permanent as long as the 27 commit to reducing their debt and applying their structural reforms. This decision, which only a few years ago seemed unimaginable, is welcome and reflects the concern of European decision-makers not to aggravate the economic and social consequences of the war in Ukraine and to deal with them in the most concerted way possible. In this sense, the pragmatism shown by the European Commission and the European States contrasts with the errors that had accumulated during the sovereign debt crisis of 2009. However, the new flexibility granted by the Commission seems like a temporary postponement. It is true that the European Central Bank remains alert to support growth, but the resumption of inflation, caused mainly by the increase in energy prices, is reducing its capacity to support the real economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A l\u2019\u00e0mbit econ\u00f2mic, l\u2019editorial del diari Le Monde<\/em><\/a> elogia el pragmatisme que han demostrat les institucions europees en relaci\u00f3 amb el pacte d\u2019estabilitat. Les normes de disciplina pressupost\u00e0ria a les quals estan subjectes els estats membres de la UE han estat suspeses fins al 2023. Aquesta nova flexibilitat nom\u00e9s pot ser permanent amb la condici\u00f3 que els Vint-i-set es comprometin a reduir el seu deute i a aplicar les seves reformes estructurals. Aquesta decisi\u00f3, que fa nom\u00e9s uns anys semblava inimaginable, \u00e9s benvinguda i reflecteix la preocupaci\u00f3 dels decisors europeus per no agreujar les conseq\u00fc\u00e8ncies econ\u00f2miques i socials de la guerra d\u2019Ucra\u00efna i per afrontar-les de la manera m\u00e9s concertada possible. En aquest sentit, el pragmatisme mostrat per la Comissi\u00f3 Europea i els Estats europeus contrasta amb els errors que s\u2019havien acumulat durant la crisi del deute sobir\u00e0 del 2009. La nova flexibilitat concedida per la Comissi\u00f3, per\u00f2, sembla un ajornament provisional. \u00c9s cert que el Banc Central Europeu segueix alerta per donar suport al creixement, per\u00f2 la represa de la inflaci\u00f3, provocada sobretot per l\u2019augment dels preus de l\u2019energia, est\u00e0 reduint la seva capacitat de suport a l\u2019economia real.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the pages of the newspaper El salto<\/em><\/a>, Anis Chowdhury and Jomo Kwame Sundaram argue that the economic sanctions applied against countries in conflict situations are aggravating the food crisis, especially in Africa. War and sanctions are the main drivers of increased food insecurity. Russia and Ukraine produce nearly a third of world wheat exports, nearly 20% of corn exports, and nearly 80% of sunflower seed products, including oil. Shipping blockades imposed in the Black Sea have also helped keep Russian exports low. All of this has pushed up world prices for grains and oilseeds, raising the cost of food across the board. On May 19, the Agricultural Price Index had risen 42% since January 2021, with wheat prices rising 91% and corn prices rising 55%. The World Bank’s Commodity Markets Outlook<\/em><\/a> for April 2022 notes that the war has transformed global production, trade and consumption and forecasts that prices will be historically high until at least 2024, which will worsen food insecurity and the inflation dynamics. On the other hand, Western embargoes on Russian oil have increased energy prices considerably. In this context, the authors state that even when they are supposedly selective, sanctions are instruments that often generate unforeseen consequences, sometimes contrary to those previously planned. For this reason, sanctions often fail to achieve their initially declared objectives. Many poor and food insecure countries are major importers of wheat from Russia and Ukraine. The combined production of both countries provides 90% of Somalia’s wheat imports, 80% of those of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and about 40% of those of Yemen and Ethiopia. According to available information, the financial blockade imposed on Russia has harmed its smaller and more vulnerable Central Asian neighbors: 4.5 million Uzbeks, 2.4 million Tajiks and almost one million Kyrgyz work in Russia. Difficulties in sending remittances cause enormous difficulties for families residing in these countries. Sanctions also hit children and other disadvantaged groups much harder. Thus, an investigation<\/a> carried out in sixty-nine countries subject to sanctions has revealed that they reduce the weight of babies and increase the probability of death before the age of three.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In turn, Xavier Mas de Xax\u00e0s warns in La Vanguardia<\/em><\/a> that wheat exports have been reduced by 40%, which has triggered the adoption of protectionist measures in different countries. In the last four years, the number of people living in regions where the conflict is the main cause of lack of food has grown by 88%. Nearly 140 million people now live in regions devastated by wars and with severe difficulties in feeding themselves. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has made the situation worse. Basic foods have become 30% more expensive due to the increase in the price of wheat. Supply is far below demand and will remain so for quite some time, according to the latest report from the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The war in Ukraine is thus causing a food crisis that will last even longer than the war itself because it will take more time to recover the fields and reestablish the supply chains. The imbalance between demand and supply triggers prices and restrictions on food exports. India is the second largest producer of wheat behind China, but it is not an exporting country. Last year it exported just over seven million tons, far from the 43 of Russia, the main exporter. The ten countries that lead the ranking of exports put more than 160 million tons of wheat on the world market last year. This year it is possible that the hundred million tons will not be reached, a drop close to 40%. Other major exporters, such as the United States and France, will have worse harvests this year due to drought and high temperatures. This is one of the reasons that India has also used for not “feeding the world”. In this sense, as the annual supply of grain is not assured, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Lebanon, Turkey, Serbia, Kosovo, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, Iran, Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Ghana The US and Argentina have banned exports of many foods. Demography also plays against it, but so do export embargoes and speculation on the price of wheat. Argentina, the United States, Canada and Australia are the most obvious markets to alleviate the lack of Russian and Ukrainian wheat, but prices are very high. Meanwhile, the UN and the World Bank are rushing to meet the needs of the most vulnerable countries with loans and aid to farmers. Qu Dongyu, director general of the FAO, has warned that agriculture is one of the keys to security and peace in the world, since food crises are often a source of conflict. Of the 800 million undernourished people, 80% live in conflict zones and their situation will continue to worsen as long as the price of wheat does not fall. The great paradox is that this year’s wheat harvest will be a record in Russia, enough to offset the ravages of the climate crisis in other latitudes and keep the price under control, but the Kremlin has other priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Along the same lines, Mario Lubetkin<\/a>, deputy director general of the FAO, affirms that in the event that the war in Ukraine and other conflicts in different parts of the world continue, the challenge for 2022 will be to guarantee greater access to currently existing food, and by 2023 ensure sufficient food production. Current data continues to show a trend of rising food prices, particularly in the neediest countries, while concern is growing about the possible effects of these increases. The potential scarcity of some products can generate internal instability in many countries, increasing internal and external migration flows at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In terms of sustainability and the fight against climate change, Slate<\/em><\/a> dedicates an article to fair trade as a lever for resilience and adaptation to the effects of climate change. Producers in developing countries are the first to be affected by the consequences of global warming. They are often on the front lines facing cyclones, hurricanes, droughts or floods that reduce the volume of crops and sometimes even decimate them. Therefore, it is impossible to raise the fight against inequalities and poverty on a planetary scale without taking into account climatic and environmental parameters, and vice versa. Without economic justice, there is no climate efficiency. For all these reasons, the fundamental commitment of the Fairtrade\/Max Havelaar movement to economic justice goes hand in hand with environmental action to support producers towards resilience and adaptation to these crucial challenges. Some products, such as cocoa, coffee and bananas, can only grow in the southern hemisphere for climatic reasons. In this sense, when you want to invest in responsible consumption, the impact of imported products raises. Contrary to what one might think, however, in the product life cycle, the transport stage is not the one that emits the most carbon. In fact, in the food sector, the majority of CO2 emissions result from agricultural production and its methods. Therefore, intensive and industrial agriculture has a much more negative impact on the planet than other modalities. It is in the production stage that the main environmental risks come into play: water contamination, soil depletion, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and population health problems. The rules include, for example, the prohibition of the use of the most dangerous pesticides and the use of biological control as soon as possible, the controlled management of water with recovery and optimization of consumption, the prohibition of transgenic, and the study and preservation biodiversity in plots or even sustainable treatment of waste, among others. Finally, the development premium received by cooperatives involved in fair trade represents an important collective lever. It is a collective investment tool for the future. Thus, some organizations use it in order to develop ambitious and innovative agro-ecological projects. In addition, with the aim to fight against deforestation, improve agricultural practices as well as with the promotion of projects from diversified sources of income so that producers are more resilient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastly, with regard to new technologies, Kris Shrishak and Risto Uuk alert Euractiv that the European Union’s Law on Artificial Intelligence runs the risk of endangering customers and citizens in terms of information systems. General purpose AI. These types of systems can perform a wide range of tasks and functions, from image or speech recognition, audio or video generation, pattern detection, question answering, or translation. This allows their use for a large number of services, such as the creation of ads or decision assistants. However, there are already cases of general-purpose AI systems spreading extremist content, showing an anti-Muslim bias, or revealing personal data. The crux of the matter is that, according to the content of the European Union act, the responsibility for these systems falls on the clients and not on the developers. This causes many problems. In the first place, to correct the behavior of one of these systems it is necessary to access its learning dataset and only trained personnel from the developer company can access it. Second, making changes to these systems involves a very high economic cost that few companies can afford. This responsibility should fall on the big development companies, often located outside the European Union. Lastly, these systems should be thoroughly reviewed before they are released to the market to avoid biases such as those cited above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastly, with regard to new technologies, Kris Shrishak and Risto Uuk alert Euractiv<\/a> that the European Union’s Law on Artificial Intelligence<\/a> runs the risk of endangering customers and citizens in terms of information systems. General purpose AI. These types of systems can perform a wide range of tasks and functions, from image or speech recognition, audio or video generation, pattern detection, question answering, or translation. This allows their use for a large number of services, such as the creation of ads or decision assistants. However, there are already cases of general-purpose AI systems spreading extremist content, showing an anti-Muslim bias, or revealing personal data. The crux of the matter is that, according to the content of the European Union act, the responsibility for these systems falls on the clients and not on the developers. This can cause several problems. In the first place, in order to redirect the behavior of one of these systems it is necessary to access its dataset; only trained personnel from the developer company can access it. Second, making changes to these systems involves a very high economic cost that few companies can afford. This responsibility should fall on the big development companies, often located outside the European Union. Lastly, these systems should be thoroughly reviewed before they are released to the market to avoid biases such as those cited above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Illustration: Anna Bittersohl, “Echolot”, 2017<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Pilar Querol, H\u00e8ctor G\u00e1mez and Arnau In\u00e9s, trainees at the CETC, have participated in this issue 63 of Diari de les idees<\/em><\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Apart from the war in Ukraine, where the violent fighting that is taking place in Severodonetsk could mean a major turn in the war scenario, and where the role of oligarchs in post-conflict Ukraine may be concerned, this new edition of the Diary of Ideas highlights the following topics. First of all, the relations between the United States and China with both statements by the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the reply from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at a time when both powers are immersed in a race diplomatic to extend its influence to the South\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":57518,"template":"","category_newspaper":[454],"segment":[],"subject":[],"class_list":["post-58067","newspaper","type-newspaper","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category_newspaper-454"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n