By now, most of us have heard about the recent failure of the UN Food Security and Nutrition Commission (FSNCC) to get its proposed national food security strategy to the United Nations Security Council.
It was supposed to take place on December 6 in New York, but the Council postponed it for an hour and a half.
The UNSC is currently chaired by the United States, which has just given a speech saying that it will vote to impose sanctions on Russia and China, while France and Britain have just sent their ambassadors to the Council.
The US is one of the countries in the EU that has already been accused of undermining the peace process and has been calling for sanctions against Russia, China and Iran.
Meanwhile, the UNSC has been conducting negotiations on a food security deal between the EU and the UNEP (UN Development Programme).
The deal is supposed to provide for the reduction of food prices by more than half.
The EU is trying to negotiate a package that would include the following: the removal of quotas, subsidies and price controls, which will be reduced to a maximum of 60 percent of the national average price.
The reduction of tariffs to 50 percent and the elimination of quotas will be combined into one, which is supposed the EU can then negotiate with Russia, Iran and China.
The EU wants the EU-UNDP deal to include food safety measures, including a new system to detect adulterated food and a ban on marketing of adulterant foods, but that has been blocked by Russia and Iran and by France, the EU’s top trading partner.
In a statement, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said: We will continue to work with the Commission to advance the EU agenda in food security and the wider agenda of promoting the right to a decent standard of living, in line with our EU-US strategic partnership.
But the EU has faced pressure from the EU, the United Kingdom and other countries to delay the deal until December 13, when the Council will vote on a resolution condemning Russia and Chinese aggression in the South China Sea and the Philippines.
While the Council has already rejected the UN’s proposal, the French government has been pressing its case to postpone the UN resolution until December 6.
After months of negotiations, the Council was supposed not to hold a special session to discuss the deal.
The French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, has said that the council would have to take up the deal at its special session in December.
Last week, however, Fabius said that he will try to hold the special session on December 10 to discuss what he called “an important step” in the negotiation process.
Fabius has made it clear that he wants to postpone a special meeting because the Council is not meeting, but he has also said that France will ask for the postponement in a written request.
If France wants to delay a special Council session, it could be to ensure that the Commission does not get its plan wrong, or that a member of the EU Commission, the Luxembourg government or the German government is not in a position to intervene on its behalf.
Fabius is trying this way to avoid a vote on the deal, he said in a statement on Friday.
On Monday, the European Commission said it will oppose any postponement of the deal as it would “have serious negative consequences for our cooperation with the United Sates in the fight against the human rights violations in the region.”
The European Commission’s position is that it is the responsibility of the United State and Russia to ensure the food security in the UNDP agreement, according to a statement released by the EU delegation.
As far as I know, the Commission has not responded to my request to postpone this meeting, as the Council does not meet in the Special Session.
Even if the Commission is not going to hold its meeting on December 11, Fabis said in his statement that the Council should take up its meeting in the special Session.
Fabius said he hopes that the United Nation and the EU will be able to come to a compromise that will protect the interests of the European Union and to help the UN reach a new agreement in the future.
The Commission, however is not sure about that.