It is ironic that despite being an agricultural country with farmers consisting the majority of its population, Indonesia remains to be the world's largest food importer.
Every year, the country imports at least 2 million tons of rice, 1.6 million tons of sugar, and 1.3 million tons of soybean.
This means that rice, sugar and soybean supplies remain insufficient to meet the country's demands.
Why should this happen? Is there any determination from the government to optimalize the country's produce?
From the government's policy on national development, it seems that the development of agriculture as a sector has been ignored, because of a liberal system in macroeconomic policy.
Thus, the protection of agriculture in Indonesia is considered important because the sector is very strategic in sustaining the economy.
No wonder the protection of the agriculture sector is the main theme of the ongoing ministerial summit of the World Trade Organization in Cancun, Mexico.
Protection of the agriculture sector is not only the demand of poor and developing countries but of developed countries as well.
-- Bisnis Indonesian, Jakarta
Parks that displace indigenous communities
"Give us our land back!" was the resounding message yesterday from the indigenous peoples representatives taking part in the World Parks Congress.
Noting that indigenous communities had been evicted and dispossessed throughout the world to make way for national parks and nature reserves, members of the delegation said it was not possible for them to move sacred sites such as mountains where a community leader had given his life in defense of his people.
A 13-point Indigenous Peoples Declaration to the congress said indigenous people should not be seen as mere "stakeholders" but as rights-holders.
-- The Star, Johannesburg, South Africa
Hamas' terrorism
A new attack, attributed to Hamas' fanatical terrorism, on Sept. 9 caused at least seven deaths at a bus stop in Tel Aviv near a military base...
Does it make sense today to apportion each and every historical responsibility? Not if a solution to the problem is sought. However, this does not mean that each day must start from scratch. Instead, U.N. resolutions and international legislation should be the starting point.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has an obvious lack of interest in respecting U.N. resolutions and in studying what can or cannot be done in the occupied territories (West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights). As a result, the Road Map, which no longer leads anywhere, and the eventual ratification of Ahmed Qurei as the new Palestinian Prime Minister resemble the steps in a tragic and useless ballet.
-- El Pais, Madrid, Spain
The costs of stabilizing Iraq
The price tag for Iraq's reconstruction, detailed by President Bush in his televised address to the nation, is indeed huge. But it is a burden Americans must bear willingly. To do anything less would risk Iraq's disintegration into a fertile land for Islamic extremism, terrorism and adventurism.
In the end, the costs of U.S. failure in Iraq would be many times greater than the US$87 billion in postwar assistance sought by President Bush. That figure includes reconstruction activities in Afghanistan as well. In the case of both countries, an American retreat from its responsibilities in the wake of U.S.- induced regime change would produce wide-scale anarchy and renewed bloodshed. As a result, the long-term security interests of the civilized world would be irreparably undermined.
That's why it's essential that the United States and its allies stay the course, regardless of the costs. The sacrifice Americans are making in Iraq and, to a lesser degree, in Afghanistan is measured in something far more precious than dollars. The military personnel who continue to lose their lives in support of the peacekeeping operations are the true measure of the U.S. commitment to stabilize both countries and eradicate any terrorist threat..... -- The San Diego Union-Tribune, San Diego, California
U.S. involvement in Iraq
"I recognize that not all of our friends agreed with our decision to enforce the Security Council resolutions and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Yet, we cannot let past differences interfere with present duties," George W. Bush said in his speech to the nation.
The speech was just as much aimed at the rest of the world. After its war adventure in Iraq, the United States needs help.
It borders on audacity for President Bush to ask the world to help out in Iraq. Last autumn, he had no use for the United Nations. Now, his staff is all but begging the United Nations to become more involved. That's because the Iraq war has become costly in both money and loss of human life.
Of course Norway and other countries must contribute to helping the Iraqis, who have gotten rid of a tyrant and dictator, but the United States can no longer demand to decide the military, political and economic developments in the country.
The U.S. request for an international military force under American command must be rejected. Such a force's duties and responsibilities should be done under U.N. leadership, but without the United Nations becoming an excuse for the United States.
-- Dagbladet, Oslo, Norway