Press conference by United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Somalia

Source: United Nations Department of Public Information (DPI)

Date: 23 Sep 2009

Failing to respond to Somalia's increased need would result in a "future of miserable destitution" and could tip the region into a far greater level of crisis, the United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Somalia said today.

At a Headquarters press conference, Mark Bowden drew attention to the increasing and acute scale of the crisis, saying that Somalia was a priority case and that the implications of not responding carried the potential to destabilize the region through the movement of Somalia's population out of the country.

Mr. Bowden said that in the past 18 months, the scale of the crisis had continued to deteriorate, and 3.6 million people -- nearly half the total population -- were now in need of continued support. And yet, Somalia had been hit by a downturn in global humanitarian assistance.

Somalia was now moving into its fifth season of drought, which dramatically effected the population, he said, noting a spike in malnutrition among children. The drought was also impacting a greater part of the country, in particular Somaliland and Puntland, as well as the epicentre in central and southern Somalia.

Added to its woes, Somalia also hosted the largest displaced population globally, with some 1.5 million displaced people living in conditions that were some of the worse in the world -- "worse even than in Darfur", he added.

He said that Somalia was dependent on large levels of external assistance, and it was the most difficult and complex environment in which humanitarian organizations presently worked. However, despite attacks on humanitarian workers and the many other obstacles, assistance levels had been maintained.

At the same time, the appeal for assistance had not been adequately met, and critical shortages remained in water sanitation, health and nutrition, which further endangered relief operations. A far clearer picture about commitments for relief aid through the end of the year was needed.

Asked whether the World Food Programme (WFP) had used trucking companies which gave money to Al-Shabab, jeopardizing funding from the United States and the United Kingdom, and if the withholding of food was then being used as a political weapon, Mr. Bowden said he did not believe there was any "run off of money" to Al-Shabab. He said measures were being taken to minimize any risks and that a risk management strategy had been introduced.

In terms of using food as a political weapon, Mr. Bowden said that humanitarian efforts in the area had a very fortunate asset in the Food Security Analysis Unit. That "very transparent mechanism" had extensive coverage across the whole of Somalia, which conducted regular monitoring and assessment.

Asked if WFP had hired military contractors with funds allocated for food, in order to protect food supplies, Mr. Bowden said that was "for sure" not the case, adding that the United Nations had its own security system which strictly prohibited employment of armed guards. Instead, efforts in the region relied on the local population and route assessments, and, in some parts of Somalia where there was a functioning government, safeguards were provided for United Nations staff and resources.

When asked how work being done by the humanitarian community had been affected by the United States air strike and if that had jeopardized efforts, Mr. Bowden said that it was too early to assess what the strike meant in humanitarian terms. He reiterated that the main challenge was that 60 per cent of the population in need of assistance resided in areas controlled by Al-Shabab and that it was vital to continue providing assistance in those areas. At this stage, people were not associating the air strike with the humanitarian effort.

Responding to a question about whether there were areas in Somalia in which either centres had closed or where there was no humanitarian access, Mr. Bowden said that yes, a United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) vaccine storage unit had been robbed and looted in Jowhar, but had since resumed operations.

A correspondent asked about threats issued by Al-Shabab against the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) and the United Nations Political Office in Somalia (UNPOS) -- but not WFP or UNICEF -- and whether Al-Shabab viewed UNDP, UNDSS or UNPOS as overly partisan.

Mr. Bowden said those statements by Al-Shabab were "propagandist in nature". In fact, at the time, neither UNDP nor UNPOS had been working in any of the areas talked about by Al-Shabab. It was especially unfortunate that DSS had been mentioned in that respect, since that body was crucial for the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

He added that the Somali population as a whole had worked and lived with the United Nations "for many, many, many years" and had a deep knowledge of the United Nations system. That could be used either in a negative way or work very profitably to provide better assistance for Somalia.

For information media • not an official record

World Food Program; Angel of Mercy or Angel of Death?

By Thomas C. Mountain
Online Journal Contributing Writer

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_5162.shtml

Sep 24, 2009, 00:19

The World Food Program, or WFP, is one of the largest of the United Nations “aid” programs.

In the Horn of Africa, the UN uses the classic carrot and stick approach, the WFP being part of the carrot with the Ethiopian military being the stick the UN uses on behalf of the Western governments enforcement of their foreign policy objectives in our part of the world.

A good example of the WFP being an arm of the Western governments is how at harvest time in Somalia in 2006 the WFP dumped all of its grain aid on the Somali market to be given away “free” just as the Somali farmers tried to sell their domestic crop, bankrupting tens of thousands of Somalia/s agricultural workers. After angry protests from the affected Somali farmers, the WFP apologized, saying the offense was an oversight and it wouldn’t happen again. Then at harvest time 2007, the WFP repeated the same act of economic sabotage it carried out in 2006 and dumped its grain aid in Somalia, driving its nail into Somalia’s agricultural coffin.

Angel of Mercy or Angel of Death? Maybe Somalia was something unusual; doesn’t the WFP bring desperately needed relief to those in the direst need?

The answer brings to mind the experience we here in Eritrea had during our first in memory two-year drought which affected the entire country in 2003-4. With all of our rain-fed agriculture failing for an unprecedented two years, the government needed to provide our people 80 percent of their food needs through grain aid to avoid starvation. The WFP, along with the rest of the international community, provided Eritrea with less than 10 percent of what was needed, forcing Eritrea to dip deeply into its hard currency reserves and come up with over $100 million for basic grain purchases.

For one of the smallest and most underdeveloped countries in the world, with only 4 million people, to come up with that kind of cash meant a lot of other critical programs in Eritrea suffered. To add insult to injury, in 2005 abundant rains brought one of the best harvests in Eritrean history and saw the WFP, along with its other aid partners, almost quintuple its grain aid, and, of course, demanding that it all be given away right as Eritrea’s farmers brought their crops to market. Eritrea’s government knew exactly what to do; thanking the WFP et al, it quickly warehoused the grain for when it would be best needed by everyone and proceeded to protect their own self sufficiency efforts in agriculture.

The WFP, upon discovering its attempts to sabotage Eritrea’s agriculture had been sidetracked, proceeded to raise a hue and cry that aid was “spoiling,” demanding the grain be released immediately and claimed to be more caring about the hungry in Eritrea than Eritrea’s own leaders.

In our part of the world, the Horn of Africa, we have come to expect any arm of the UN to behave pretty badly. When the government in Ethiopia held elections in 2005 and got soundly thrashed, it was various arms of the UN that jumped in and proclaimed its support for the Meles Zenawi ethnic minority regime in Ethiopia, and helped keep its local “enforcer” in power. This despite the Ethiopian regime killing over 500 and jailing another 50,000. In 2006, it was under the mantle of the UN that the West’s Ethiopian strong arms invaded Somalia, bringing to an end the efforts of the Union of Islamic Courts and the first real peace Somali had seen in 15 years. In 2007, the UN was there giving legitimacy to the other Western capo in the Horn, Kenya’s Kibaki, when he stole the election. Just as in Chad, where the UN openly sanctioned Western military intervention, i.e., French troops, to keep one of Africa’s most corrupt leaders in power, the rule of law has been so blatantly violated that only an organization that feels itself above any accountability would be responsible.

Noam Chomsky has said that US foreign policy is like that of the mafia, and we denizens of Africa’s Horn have seen just how the UN is simply another arm of that octopus.

Stay tuned to the onlinejournal.com for more news from Africa’s Horn that the so-called “Free press in the West” refuses to cover.

Thomas C. Mountain, the last white man living in Eritrea, was in a former life, educator, activist and alternative medicine practitioner in the USA. Email thomascmountain at yahoo.com.

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

In Somalia, UN Denies Mercenary Use, Admits Areas Unserved, WFP and USAID Cancel Q&A

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 23 -- In the wake in Somalia of the UN World Food Program's self-investigation of the relation of its aid distribution system and the Al Shabaab rebels, Inner City Press on September 23 asked the UN's humanitarian coordinator for Somalia Mark Bowden if, as Somali sources say, WFP has hired military contractors, with USAID money. Video here, from Minute 10:28.

These are allegations by Somali sources which Inner City Press sought to ask the most senior officials of USAID and WFP about at what was advertised as a press availability on September 22, in the Millennium Hotel across from the UN. When Inner City Press arrives, early, for the Q&A session, WFP executive director Josette Sheeran was visible in a meeting with USAID signs on the wall.

After a staff member confirmed it was Inner City Press which came to ask questions, the Q&A session was canceled, as was a second USAID session set for September 24. So the question was asked of Bowden as UN humanitarian coordinator.

Bowden replied as to WFP, "I'm sure they haven't employed military contracts." He said that he is the UN system's Department of Safety & Security (DSS) designated security officer for the country. He then acknowledged that there are parts of Somalia where DSS cannot operate, where the UN relies on the security of "the agencies concerned" -- that is, WFP. Video here, from Minute 15:50

There is a serious drought in Somalia, and Inner City Press asked Bowden to confirm that there are areas where the UN has no humanitarian access. Bowden replied that yes there are, for example in Johar, where UNICEF vaccines were looted. He said that usually the "local community" makes good or provides assurances, but that hasn't happened in Johar.

Inner City Press asked about the Shabaab's statements against DSS, the UN Development Program and Ould Abdullah's UNPOS, but not against WFP and UNICEF. Bowden called these statements "propagandist in nature" since, he said, UNPOS and UNDP weren't then working in the areas Shabaab referred to. He called it unfortunate, as it appears to have sidelined DSS. Could this explain Somali's increasing allegation that the UN is using military contractors?

UN's Mark Bowden, no service in Johar, mercenaries and promised FSMAU report not shown

While Bowden scoffed that it would be nearly impossible for the UN to use military contractors, Inner City Press when it inquired into the UN's operations in Basra in Iraq was told:

Subj: your question on security in Basra
From: unspokesperson-donotreply [at] un.org
To: matthew.lee [at] innercitypress.com
Sent: 9/2/2009 4:27:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

In Basra, where the UN Assistance Mission in Iraq has a small presence, UNAMI has occasionally used in the past private security guards (who were also providing security to the UK diplomats) to escort UN staff to meetings with the local Iraqi officials at the civilian side of the airport. That was paid through a support agreement with the UK, which was responsible for security in Basra at the time.

So, contrary to what Mr. Bowden said, it is not so difficult for the UN to use / benefit from military contractors. But who might be performing this role in Somalia?

Footnote: While USAID canceled both of its press availabilities, and WFP canceled on September 22, it is hoped that further information can be obtained outside of New York on September 25, and beyond. Regarding USAID there are other questions regarding, for example, Afghanistan and Bolivia. Watch this site.

* * *

At WFP, Ethics Missing Amid Waste and Garage Scandals as Josette Travels the World, Food Program Whistleblowers Say

By Matthew Russell Lee, News Analysis
www.innercitypress.com/wfp1questions081609.html

UNITED NATIONS, August 15 -- In the wake of the World Food Program's controversial shut down of its Rome headquarters for a "simulated food distribution" display for the spouses of G-8 leaders, reported on by Inner City Press and skipped by both Michelle Obama and Carla Bruni, more and more whistleblowers from within WFP have approached Inner City Press with their complaints.

Most center around what they call the excessive travel and waste of Executive Director Josette Sheeran, the cover-up of scandals by weak ethical controls and discipline by promotion out to the field, and use of WFP for political purposes, fancy junkets and receptions and a make-up post for UN insider Staffan de Mistura. Inner City Press has asked WFP about these, and has received some answers.

Here is a sample complaint received from within WFP, anonymous due to fear of retaliation, then some WFP responses:

Matthew, Your reporting on the "Disneyland" school feeding show for the G-8 spouses was excellent. And many, many people in WFP agreed with you and had real doubts about it. The tents have come down but there's been no word on whether the contributions have increased to pay for it, and to feed more hungry poor. You should however, be aware that many WFP workers did attend work that day, even though parking was very difficult and WFP is not well connected by public transport to the areas in Rome where most staffers live. There are WFP staff who do have principles.

At 8:20, those not involved with the event were told through the PA system to remain at their workstations until the event was over and coffee, tea and water was placed on tables by the elevators on each floor. In other words, the staff were not welcome. Maybe that's why they were "encouraged" to "work from home".

Many dedicated long-term WFP staff see the current regime as a joke. Around the time of the G-8 event, Josette was also slated to attend the Non-Aligned Movement First Ladies Group in exotic Sharm El Sheikh. Clearly she's into Wives Clubs, which is not where she should be. However, perhaps because of the embarrassment of the G-8 wives event, she canceled.

We interrupt this whistleblowing for WFP's response:

"Greg Barrow is on leave. Please find the following responses to your questions. Ms. Sheeran was invited to the event but due other commitments, did not attend. She was represented by Ms. Sheila Sisulu, WFP's Deputy Executive Director for Hunger Solutions, who delivered a keynote speech and met with the host of the NAM First Ladies conference, Mrs. Mubarak to discuss school feeding and nutrition."

The whistleblower continued:

Word is that in the second half of 2009, she will spend perhaps no more than three weeks in Rome. A lot of her time is in Washington and elsewhere in the US (are we feeding Americans now, or is she doing something else there?). And there is a trip to places like Australia (over a weekend, of course). So who is actually running the organization? How can she justify, even with annual leave, spending less than one eighth of her time at her desk? Money which could and should be spent on feeding people or on properly staffing key departments or systems is being blown on business class airfares for her and her accompanying delegations and on school-feeding conferences near the north Italian lakes when somewhere within driving distance from Rome would have done, to name a few.

There are stories of parties being held costing more than 100 Euro per head at fancy Roman villas, paid for by WFP and/or FAO for people who never even worked for either organization. 100 Euro can buy about 300kg of wheat. Instead of feeding/entertaining one fat cat for a night, that's a lot of children who could be served.

Again, WFP had a different spin:

Ms. Sheeran's schedule for the rest of this year is still being finalized and will be adjusted as the year progresses depending on the most pressing needs and priorities. As the schedule stands today, she will be in Rome for a number of weeks. The role of a WFP Executive Director involves travel demands, which can often be sudden, such as a trip to Myanmar after the cyclone when WFP has an emergency response, or to donor countries to meet high level representatives. This fall, Ms. Sheeran's will make her first donor trip to Australia as part of a wider travel plan which includes WFP field operation visits. We believe you are referring to an official event co-hosted by WFP and FAO in honor of the departing President of IFAD, our sister UN agency in Rome.

But how much did it cost? At least on the Simulated Food Distribution Display for G-8 Spouses, WFP has finally given its own figure as to cost: 219,000 Euros. Click here for Inner City Press' counter calculations.

Inner City Press has asked, twice, about the new but we're told absent held of ethics, Joe Scalice, and whether notice was given of the vacancy externally or even internally. The post because open when Shuresh Sharma was moved to WFP's oversight office. From there, Inner City Press is told, an official was caught in a scandal in WFP's garage, then quickly exiled to the Sri Lanka IDP crisis. Inner City Press has asked:

What notice was given to internal candidates that they could apply? How many applied? Also, please comment on fraud case in Johannesburg starting next month and a whistleblower's statement that the individual "who headed it previously was very quickly sent out to the field when he was caught by the security guards in the underground executive car park in his car with a young lady, and they weren't discussing audit matters. So they may have had to fill it very quickly. I think it was done internally. Also, there has been an exodus from audit in the past year." Steffan de Mistura's post, did anyone previously hold it? or was it a new / made up post? Was the Executive Board consulted?

When the requested answers are received, they will be published on this site.

And see,www.innercitypress.com/wfp1questions081609.html

WFP In Pyongyang Has Korean Speakers Expelled, Flies African Children to Eat for G-8

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/wfp1nkrome070209.html

UNITED NATIONS, July 2 -- While the UN in New York announced that its World Food Program will shrink what remains of its program in North Korea, in the midst of declining donor confidence and missile tests by Pyongyang, the UN was more quiet about the restrictions it had been under and is accepting in the country. WFP in a memorandum from Beijing notes that the Kim Jong Il government now requires that none of WFP's remaining international staff should be able to speak Korean.

Inner City Press is told that WFP - Pyongyang's main Korea speaker was expelled from the country as persona non grata on June 20 and that this bodes badly for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon naming a new UN envoy to North Korea. Reportedly, Ban had focused on a South Korean envoy, with an eye toward running the candidate by members at the upcoming G-8 meeting. But if Kim Jong Il is expelling from the country what few UN system Korean speakers remained, such an envoy seems even less likely.

Speaking of WFP and the G-8, for the upcoming meeting WFP is flying in children from Ghana to eat as a part of an "exhibit" for the spouses of G-8 leaders on July 10. The internal WFP email is below. Several WFP sources expressed disgust to Inner City Press at the event, which they ascribe to WFP head Josette Sheeran. One asked, "Would she parade around Food Stamp recipient in the United States?" They put the expenses of the event, including the substantial closure of the WFP headquarters on July 10, at $500,000.

The e-mail:

Rome colleagues:

As you know, Italy will be hosting the G8 Summit next week and leaders from more than two dozen countries will be in L’Aquila. We are honored that the Italian government has asked WFP to host an official program at our headquarters on Friday, 10 July, as part of the spouse program.
This visit is a profound testament to the increasing visibility of WFP's work -- and an opportunity to help the world better understand the important work we do. On our premises, we are arranging a simulated food distribution and a symbolic African schoolhouse, where a small group of Ghanaian schoolchildren will help celebrate our work. (You may have noticed the large exhibit being erected this morning behind the pool.)

Due to the security precautions mandated by the Italian government and the visiting delegations, only those employees involved in the event or deemed necessary for critical operations by their managers will be permitted on the main building premises during the morning of July 10. Among other things, parking will be severely limited at our main building and automobile access limited in Parco de Medici in general.

But we encourage you to take advantage of this special exhibit and bring your families, including your children, on the afternoon of 10 July – anytime after 2:00 – so they can get a taste of our field work and meet the schoolchildren. If you cannot bring your family on 10 July, note that the tent and displays will remain up on Monday, 13 July, so we invite you to bring family members to see the display then.

Though this is a special event, we realize it might cause some inconvenience. We hope you can appreciate what an historic opportunity this is for some of the world’s most influential people to understand what we do and to see the impact of their donations.

Here are some guidelines for the day: If you work in the main building, please do not come to the office Friday morning, 10 July. The St. Martin’s building will remain open. As much as possible, please work from home... We expect the main building to re-open for business as usual at 2:00, so if it's feasible for you to return, please do so. If returning to the office in the afternoon is not feasible for you -- we recognize that some of the Parco de Medici transit options do not run in the afternoon, for instance – you are authorized special leave with full pay. Thank you,

Steve Taravella
Chief of Internal Communications, World Food Programme
Via C.G. Viola 68,Rome, Italy 00148

And see, www.innercitypress.com/wfp1nkrome070209.html

A Gulf in Giving: Oil-Rich States Starve the World Food Program

By George Russell

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354677,00.html

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his top lieutenants on Monday are convening the first meeting of the U.N.’s Task Force on the Global Food Crisis. Ban says it will “study the root causes of the crisis,” and propose solutions for “coordinated global action” at a summit of world leaders in June.

Ban might want to consider convincing the oil-rich nations of the Middle East to provide more than the near-invisible amount of money they currently give to the World Food Program (WFP), the U.N.’s food-giving arm, which is charged with alleviating the food crisis.

WFP internal documents show that the major oil producing nations of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) gives almost nothing to the food organization, even as skyrocketing oil prices and swollen oil revenues contribute to the very crisis that the U.N. claims could soon add 100 million more people to the world’s starving masses.

The overwhelming bulk of the burden in feeding the world’s starving poor remains with the United States and a small group of other predominately Western nations, a situation that the WFP has done little so far to change, even as it has asked for another $775 million in donations to ease the crisis.

Donor listings on WFP’s website show that this year, as in every year since 1999, the U.S. is far and away the biggest aid provider to WFP. Since 2001, U.S. donations to the food agency have averaged more than $1.16 billion annually — or more than five times as much as the next biggest donor, the European Commission.

Click here to see WFP's donor lists from 2001 to 2007.

This year, the U.S. had contributed $362.7 million to WFP just through May 4, according to the website. That figure does not include another $250 million above the planned yearly contribution that was promised by President George W. Bush in the wake of WFP’s April warning that a “silent tsunami” of rising food costs would add dramatically to the world population living in hunger. Nor does it include another $770 million in food aid that President Bush has asked Congress to provide as soon as possible.

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, with oil revenues last year of $164 billion, does not even appear on the website donor list for 2008.

Click here to see the 2008 donor list.

And while Canada, Australia, Western Europe and Japan have hastened to pony up an additional $260 million in aid since WFP’s latest appeal, the world organization told FOX News, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the international oil cartel, tossed in a grand total of $1.5 million in addition to the $50,000 it had previously donated.

The OPEC total amounts to roughly one minute and 10 seconds worth of the organization’s estimated $674 billion in annual oil revenues in 2007 — revenues that will be vastly exceeded in 2008 with the continuing spiral in world oil prices.

The only other major oil exporter who made the WFP list of 2008 donors was the United Arab Emirates, which kicked in $50,000. UAE oil revenues in 2007 were $63 billion.

By contrast, the poverty-stricken African republic of Burkina Faso is listed as donating more than $600,000, and Bangladesh, perennial home of many of the world’s hungriest people, is listed as donating nearly $5.8 million.

George Russell is executive editor of FOX News.

World Food Program Wants Even More Money, Despite Ease in Crisis

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

By George Russell

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520033,00.html

A little more than a year after the United Nations World Food Program declared that the globe faced a "silent tsunami" of rising food prices and oil costs, the crisis appears to be over. But for the WFP the fact that the tsunami has receded hasn't stopped it from asking for more money than ever.

WFP says it needs $6.3 billion this year, and roughly the same amount in 2010 and 2011 to feed the world's most desperately hungry. That's $600 million more than last year, when the so-called hunger tsunami was at its worst. And it's considerably more than double the roughly $2.7 billion annually that the agency spent before WFP chief Josette Sheeran declared the existence of a food crisis on April 22, 2008.

So far, it's received only $1.13 billion of the 2009 total, though the agency says it's confident that all $6.3 billion will be collected.

Meantime, however, world oil prices, which have ticked upward beyond $58 per barrel in the past few days, are still less than 40% of the $150 per barrel they reached in April, 2008, when the food crisis was declared.

International food prices-especially for grains-are down 35% to 50%, from their highs, after a record harvest of many crops last year and more of the same forecast this year. WFP says world wheat supplies are at their highest level in six years. According to a report by Commodity Information Systems, Inc., a U.S.-based analytics firm, U.S. wheat stocks rose by 9% between April and May alone. And a new report by the U.N.'s Food and Agricultural Organization says that world cereal stocks by the end of 2009 should be at their highest level since 2002.

Click here to read the FAO Report.

According to the WFP itself, grain prices will remain "at current levels or to increase slightly over the next 18 months."

But despite those dramatic decreases in food costs, a WFP spokesman says the organization has dropped its own budget estimates for this year and the near future by only $1 billion, or about 14%.

Why the difference between WFP's budget planning and food and energy costs in the real world?

According to WFP, a number of factors are involved, starting with the fact that the agency is feeding more hungry people: 105 million in 2009, vs. 86.1 million in 2007.

For some of its operations, WFP is also feeding them longer; an average of four months vs. the previous year's three. "In dire situations, like in the Horn of Africa, some people require sustained food supplies throughout the year, not just during peak hunger periods," according to the agency spokesman.

In addition, the spokesman said, it simply didn't lower its costs to the levels that current prices might indicate were appropriate. "Our downward budget revision reflected a 25% reduction in our food costs and a 7% reduction in our transport costs," the spokesman said, adding that "only 20% of our transport costs move in tandem with fuel."

But that would still seem to leave a lot of leeway. And in some cases, WFP not been spending less money on food but more—purchasing expensive food products that cost many times more than the basics it provided before there was a food emergency. Among the items mentioned by a WFP spokesman were corn soya grain blends rather than traditional corn; and chickpea- and peanut-based manufactured products, which the spokesman said were "more nutritious".

But they are also much more expensive. Using South African prices as a baseline, the spokesman said corn soya blend costs 45% more than traditional corn, and chickpeas a whopping 1,100% more, while one ready-to-use peanut-based product cost 1,400% more.

The spokesman did not cite the amounts involved, but in a tacit admission that WFP may have overused the pricey commodities last year-despite the "silent tsunami"-said that "we have encouraged our country directors this year to look at ways to use these more nutritious products selectively and where they can have the most nutritional impact."

But the most dramatic switch for WFP from its past policies, is not what it purchases but how it purchases.

WFP is now using its increase in funds to make much greater numbers of cash-on-the-barrelhead purchases of local food supplies in developing regions, rather than passing on large quantities of foodstuffs donated by rich exporters like the U.S.

Last year, for example, WFP got $4.15 billion in cash from donors and only $887 million in in-kind food supplies, and according to the spokesman spent $1.1 billion procuring food in 73 developing countries.

The change in WFP's cash vs. in-kind balance is something that it has sought as a long term strategy to become more of an international food welfare agency doling out cash than a food bank handing out imported emergency supplies.

Many WFP experts have long argued that in-kind contributions stunt local food markets and depress local food prices, and that the agency's increasing use of cash in local markets "helps small farmers produce food and gain access to income so they no longer need food assistance," as the WFP spokesman put it.

But at the same time as the WFP has been buying local food in a major way, the spokesman revealed that "an analysis of domestic food prices for 58 developing countries shows that in around 80% of the cases, food prices are higher than 12 months ago, and in around 40% higher than three months ago. In 17% of the cases, the latest price quotations are the highest on record."

This price hike, the spokesman said, hit hardest at the "urban poor and food deficit farmers who are dependent on the market to access food."

WFP insists that its own food purchases in those fragile markets have had little to do with the devastating local food price spiral-which has been going on despite the drop in world food prices.

"We always seek to [procure food] in a way that disrupts markets as little as possible," the spokesman said. "We have competitive tenders and do not pay monopoly prices."

That may be so, but competitive tenders for additional supplies in tight food markets can cause prices to go up. And prices where WFP buys food are definitely going up.

In fact, that is where the "silent tsunami" seems to have moved: from world markets, where basic food commodities appear to be in abundance, to local markets in the struggling parts of the world where the WFP is now buying increasing amounts of its supplies.

And WFP intends to keep buying.

George Russell is executive editor of FOX News