LEADER 04009nam 22005655 450 001 9911026154603321 005 20190723020930.0 010 $a9781501742835 010 $a1501742833 024 7 $a10.7591/9781501742835 035 $a(CKB)4100000008965238 035 $a(DE-B1597)533970 035 $a(OCoLC)1110709418 035 $a(DE-B1597)9781501742835 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC31211489 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL31211489 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000008965238 100 $a20190723d2019 fg 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aFood Trade and Foreign Policy $eIndia, the Soviet Union, and the United States /$fRobert L. Paarlberg 205 $a1st ed. 210 1$aIthaca, NY : $cCornell University Press, $d[2019] 210 4$dİ1985 215 $a1 online resource 311 08$a9780801417726 311 08$a0801417724 327 $tFrontmatter -- $tContents -- $tPreface -- $tIntroduction -- $t1. The Food Power Presumption -- $t2. India: Domestic Sources of Grain Trade Policy -- $t3. The Soviet Union: Retreat from Food Power -- $t4. The United States: Food Power Forgone -- $t5. Testing Food Power: U.S. Food Aid to India 1965-1967 -- $t6. Testing Food Power: Embargo on U.S. Grain to the Soviet Union 1980-1981 -- $tConclusion -- $tNotes -- $tBibliography -- $tIndex 330 $aWhen U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Earl L. Butz announced in 1974 that "food is a weapon," he voiced a growing national belief in the political power of food resources. President Carter's 1980 decision to embargo grain sales to the Soviet Union appeared at first to confirm this popular notion. But can exporting nations, such as the United States, really use food as a powerful instrument of foreign policy? If so, are they using that weapon more frequently? Are importing nations taking steps to reduce their vulnerability? Challenging the view that food has emerged as a political weapon, Robert Paarlberg undertakes the first systematic inquiry into the relation between food resources and international power.Paarlberg maintains that food trade is seldom manipulated for reasons of foreign policy, due to the greater priority assigned by most nations to domestic food and farm policy objectives. To support his argument, he reviews the recent grain trade experience of three significant and divergent nations?India, the Soviet Union, and the United States. He then examines in detail two exceptional instances in which the coercive power of the U.S. food weapon was put to the test: Lyndon Johnson's manipulation of food aid to India in 1965?1967 and the Carter embargo on grain sales to the Soviet Union in 1980?1981. He concludes that the difficulties experienced in each instance only reinforced the larger trend against linking grain trade policy to foreign policy?a trend that can be applauded by those concerned with world food security and trade efficiency.Robert Paarlberg's challenge of the food power concept provides a valuable comparative insight into the conduct of national as well as international food policies. 606 $aFood Studies 606 $aGeneral Economics 606 $aPOLITICAL SCIENCE / Public Policy / Agriculture & Food Policy (see also SOCIAL SCIENCE / Agriculture & Food) $2bisacsh 607 $aUnited States$xForeign relations 607 $aSoviet Union$xForeign relations 607 $aIndia$xForeign relations 615 4$aFood Studies. 615 4$aGeneral Economics. 615 7$aPOLITICAL SCIENCE / Public Policy / Agriculture & Food Policy (see also SOCIAL SCIENCE / Agriculture & Food) . 676 $a382.4131 700 $aPaarlberg$b Robert L., $01808740 712 02$aHarvard University.$bCenter for International Affairs. 801 0$bDE-B1597 801 1$bDE-B1597 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9911026154603321 996 $aFood Trade and Foreign Policy$94432674 997 $aUNINA