It is ironic that despite being an agricultural country with

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