April 2011 - Centre for Civil Society - University of KwaZulu-Natal

could be food surplus in a short time," recalls Som Pal.
His plans were, however, rendered futile, as a hostile system overwhelmed
him, even attempting to buy water hand-pumps at $12,500 apiece. "Most
African leaders are only keen on projecting the agony of their people for
international support in dollars," laments Som Pal. "A complete nexus
between institutions, large corporations and narrow, vested interests are
at work." Elements of this trend can be seen in India too.
Since then, Som Pal has had several brushes with Kenya and Zambia too;
the story runs along similar lines. How then would he evaluate the much
celebrated Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) - an initiative
driven by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, the oldest and the largest philanthropic repositories,
respectively, in the world? The Gates Foundation alone has committed
$264.5 million to AGRA.
"They are using the pitiable condition of the African people to get a
foothold into the continent," explains Som Pal. "Their large philanthropic
resources are being utilised to further the interests of business." In
countries with weak governance mechanisms, like in Africa, it becomes a
lot easier.
Proponents of chemical-free and GMO-free (genetically modified
organisms), sustainable agricultural practices like Som Pal are beginning to
feel uncomfortable about AGRA and a host of big-ticket philanthropic
initiatives across developing countries. As are an increasing number of
independent policy wonks and scientists across the world.
For instance, the Gates Foundation's sheer clout is taking it, intentionally
or unintentionally, to places where policy, business and philanthropy
intersect. There are its business and investment links with large companies
that are driven by the profit motive. There is its growing stranglehold in
the policy-making space across emerging markets, especially in education,
healthcare and agriculture.
The $23.1-million investment by the Gates Foundation in Monsanto, the
world's largest producer of GM seeds, is a small example of a trend.
Civil society organisations see it as vindication of what they had always
suspected: the unstated agenda of pushing GM crops into Africa. In recent
times, though, following strident protests, Bill Gates appears to have
tempered his views on agriculture; he talks about picking the best from
organics and tech-driven agriculture.
The Gates Foundation's insistence that its investments and grants ought to
be seen separately has also attracted considerable flak. The question is
asked: how can it be a 'passive investor' in companies such as Monsanto
when its avowed goal is doing good with philanthropic monies? "Doubts
about his (Bill Gates) larger motives, despite some good outcomes of his
charity, are beginning to cloud my thinking," concedes Mira Shiva, a public
health activist. Two emails sent by ET to the Gates Foundation, on
December 29 and March 22, went unanswered.
In his blog postings and writings, Eric Holt-Gimenez, director of the USbased
Food First: Institute for Food and Development Policy, labels it
'Monsanto in Gates' clothing'.
He describes how AGRA, as a prelude to the introduction of GMOs, is laying
the ground for a conventional breeding programme - labs, experiment