Food as a weapon? The embargo on grain trade between USA and USSR

Tarrant, John

doi:10.1016/0143-6228(81)90012-6

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Di sisi lain, ilmuwan sosial menilai kehadiran tersebut justru memperluas insekuritas pangan dan risiko sosial dan lingkungan, selain itu mereka menunjukkan bahwa kelaparan terjadi bukan semata-mata kurangnya ketersediaan pangan, melainkan lonjakan kelaparan akibat tidak seimbangnya distribusi output pangan dan kurangnya hak politik, sosial dan ekonomi (Keen, 2008 kelaparan turut diperhatikan dari perspektif ini. Kelaparan merupakan konsekuensi logis dari perang dan konflikbahkan hadirnya konflik yang besar berlangsung pada upaya mempertahankan atau menganeksasi teritorial yang memiliki sumber pangan yang besar (J.R. Tarrant, 1981). Pandangan ini sebenarnya diilhami oleh Kanneth Waltz 1979 Konteks ketahanan pangan dalam pandangan neorealis dapat dihubungkan melalui tersedianya institusi global yang mengatur pola kerja sama dalam permintaan dan penawaran terhadap ketersediaan pangan (kelembagaan neoliberal).…”

Section: Pembahasan Definisi Ketahanan Pangan: Tinjauan Historisunclassified

Dialog Insekuritas Pangan Berdasarkan Kajian Keamanan Internasional: Gugatan Pendekatan Kritis Terhadap Pendekatan Arus-Utama

Rivai¹

2021

RIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artikel ini merupakan studi pustaka teoretis dalam mengeksplorasi berbagai perspektif tentang insekuritas pangan. Penulis memusatkan perhatian pada diskusi insekuritas pangan, berupa kelaparan yang dianggap memiliki beberapa limitasi pandangan. Diskursus ketahanan pangan dan kedaulatan pangan saling bertentangan. Meski begitu, keduanya bukan sebagai konsep yang saling bertentangan, melainkan sebagai konsep yang saling terkait, terutama mencakup upaya penanggulangan kelaparan yang meliputi akses, distribusi, keamanan dan kesetaraan. Sedangkan pendekatan keamanan nasional yang berbasis realisme dan human security berdasarkan Copenhagen School memiliki perbedaan yang cukup signifikan. Namun, keduanya memiliki limitas dalam memposisikan kelaparan sebagai masalah keamanan. Realisme yang bertumpu pada tempat-tempat yang berpusat pada negara menangani kelaparan adalah konsentrasi kegiatan pemerintah dalam menjamin kepentingan nasional, sehingga kebijakan yang ada adalah bagaimana ketersediaan atau surplus pangan dapat dipenuhi. Selanjutnya perspektif human security melihat pada masalah kelaparan yang dihadapi manusia sehingga diperlukan proses sekuritisasi yang dilakukan oleh agen. Di sini terlihat bahwa tindakan untuk mengatasi masalah fundamental hanya menjadi tanggung jawab elit pemerintah, sedangkan suara kepentingan individu yang mengalami kelaparan terabaikan. Dengan demikian, pendekatan keamanan kritis muncul dalam menengahi beragam limitasi di atas. Isu kelaparan harus mengalami pembingkaian ulang baik secara definisi maupun dalam aplikasi kebijakan sebagaimana masalah keamanan ini sebagai masalah structural.

show abstract

Section: Pembahasan Definisi Ketahanan Pangan: Tinjauan Historisunclassified

Dialog Insekuritas Pangan Berdasarkan Kajian Keamanan Internasional: Gugatan Pendekatan Kritis Terhadap Pendekatan Arus-Utama

Rivai¹

2021

RIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, US grain exports were reduced from an expected $4.8 billion to $1.5 billion with Washington having to resort to approximately $3billion government purchases to compensate the farmers. 71 Russia was quick to find alternative suppliers such as Argentina and Brazil. It also found producers of high-tech equipment in Western Europe and Japan, with the US subsequently losing two-thirds of an expected $150 million.…”

Section: Political Controversy and Legacies Of The 1980 Moscow Olympicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘War and Peace’ at the 1980 Moscow and 2014 Sochi Olympics: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Russian Identity

Kramareva

Grix

2018

The International Journal of the History of Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russia's (and the USSR's) use of sports mega-events (SMEs) makes this BRICS country (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) not only an outlier among emerging states, but also among key SME hosts generally. In this paper the authors argue that both the historic Moscow Olympics (1980) and the more recent hosting of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics provide evidence that Russia has, on both occasions, focused on geopolitical priorities using hard power (military might) at the expense of soft power acquisition. Further, the authors advance the notion that first and foremost both Olympics were used to pursue domestic soft power goals, which, again, makes Russia an outlier in terms of the political use of sports mega-events by states in the literature on this subject. The 1980 Olympic Games, therefore, in terms of their potential to generate soft power and national unity, turned out to be a mis-used opportunity for Russia. The authors explore the extent to which this is specific to Russia and whether the first Russian Olympics could provide valuable insight into the modern-day hosting of sports megaevents by Russia (2014Russia ( /2018

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, there are peripheral relationships: hunger is frequently a consequence of war and conflict; wars have long been fought over fertile lands, especially to capture resources to feed a growing empire; and the deprivation of food and water was the essence of medieval siege warfare. The potential role of food as a weapon also had a very minor role in the literature during the Cold War (Paarlberg, 1982;Tarrant, 1981). Even though there is growing interest among security scholars in political violence linked to the deprivation of food, say from sudden price rises or production calamities, or where the prospect of interstate violence looms over food-producing resources (Dupont, 2001: 106), state-centric scholarship on food security and hunger is scarce.…”

Section: State-centric Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking critically about food security

Shepherd

2012

Security Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the tension between food security as strategic practice and as the human insecurity of hunger. It makes the case that hunger is a security matter that warrants greater attention from security scholars, but identifies some limitations with state-centric and human security approaches. The article explores Ken Booth's 'emancipatory realism' security project as one avenue for overcoming these limitations and uses Booth's work to assist in developing a reframing of food security. It proposes redefining food security in terms of securing vulnerable populations from the structural violence of hunger, and argues that such a framing offers both conceptual and practical value for efforts to confront the problem of increasing and widespread hunger.

show abstract

Food as a weapon? The embargo on grain trade between USA and USSR

Cited by 8 publications

References 5 publications

Dialog Insekuritas Pangan Berdasarkan Kajian Keamanan Internasional: Gugatan Pendekatan Kritis Terhadap Pendekatan Arus-Utama

Dialog Insekuritas Pangan Berdasarkan Kajian Keamanan Internasional: Gugatan Pendekatan Kritis Terhadap Pendekatan Arus-Utama

‘War and Peace’ at the 1980 Moscow and 2014 Sochi Olympics: The Role of Hard and Soft Power in Russian Identity

Thinking critically about food security

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About