Summit haggles over hunger declaration

Political squabbling put a U.N. summit on the global food crisis at risk of closing on Thursday without a powerful declaration on how to stop millions more people going hungry.

"The food crisis which the world faces today is so serious that it would be disastrous for the survival of mankind if the conclusions reached suffer the same fate at this historic summit," said Ghana's President John Kufuor in speech delivered by an aide.

Delegates from 151 countries at the Rome talks, which began with speeches from 44 leaders on Tuesday, missed their Wednesday deadline for agreeing a final statement about "eliminating hunger and securing food for all".

"They will look at a new draft which they can either approve, try to amend or, in the worst case, reject," said a U.N. official as the last day of the meeting began.

The issue putting the talks at risk was not the most contentious debate -- biofuels, which anti-hunger campaigners say diverts food from mouths into gas tanks -- but disagreement between opponents and supporters of communist Cuba about mention of U.S. sanctions against the communist island, as well as other marginal issues.

The summit was called by the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation to discuss securing food supplies in the face of rising demand - especially from rapidly developing Asian countries - poor harvests and rising fuel costs.

Those factors have contributed to a doubling of commodity prices over the last couple of years which the World Bank says has put 100 million people at risk of joining the 850 million already going hungry.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development sees prices of rice, corn and wheat retreating from peaks but still up to 50 percent higher in the next decade. The FAO says food production must rise 50 percent by 2050 to meet demand.

BRUTAL PRICE RISE

The summit's main message was due to be: "We firmly resolve to use all means to alleviate the suffering caused by the current crisis, to stimulate food production and to increase investment in agriculture."

Some question the use of the summit. President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal, a sceptic of international attempts to solve hunger and critic of the FAO, said it was a waste of time.

"There's been a brutal rise in prices (of food) and we were told there was a threat hanging over the world and all the heads of state were called to attend. I thought it was going to be to answer the question about what should be done, but it wasn't that at all," Wade told Reuters.

"It was just a conference like any other and that's why I was disappointed," said Wade, one of more than 40 heads of state and government who attended the Rome summit.

British-based poverty campaign group Oxfam was more upbeat.

"It would be very easy to dismiss this food summit as a talking shop," said Barbara Stocking, head of Oxfam GB. "But it could be a stepping stone to better policies and the money to implement them."

Although the summit was not meant to produce promises of aid or set new global policies, it has set the tone on food and hunger for more concrete talks in the coming months.

Group of Eight leaders meet in Japan in July, by which time a food crisis task force set up by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is due to have issued a concrete action plan.

The summit's talks on the potential benefits to poor farmers from new global trade rules will feed into a push to conclude the so-called Doha round of World Trade Organisation talks, which reach a potentially conclusive phase in the coming weeks.

The United States, which is diverting increasing amounts of its maize harvest into automobile fuel, came under attack from some countries and poverty campaigners who have called for a rethink of policies to promote fuel made from foodstuffs.

Washington acknowledges that the spread of biofuels has added to the demand for crops, especially maize, and contributed to food inflation, but only by a marginal amount.