list political and economic policies of that country's leftist government.
The intent of some of these efforts was laudable; of others pathetic; of yet others laughable; and of some downright sinister. Nowhere were the governments of the western industrialized countries found offering the massive amounts of aid required. Many private efforts were rela tively ineffective (the US$80 million raised by the Live Aid Concert would not even begin to address the hunger problems in Ethiopia much less those in the rest of Africa and in the rest of the world). Nowhere were the giant and powerful agribusi ness multinationals found sacrificing profits to prevent 3starvation. The agribusiness giants, at least, were quiet. The Reagan Administration, by contrast, was busy blaming Ethiopian hunger on the policies of that country's government, which, presumably, purposefully brought about an African drought, which had been identified as one of the major causes of food production problems in northern and eastern Africa (The World Food Institute, 1985).
Throughout all of the concern expressed over the hunger in Ethiopia, no mention was made in the western media of any culpa bility on the part of western agribusiness multinationals, or of the policies of the industrialized countries for the devel opment and continued existence of world hunger. Within the Reagan Administration's condemnations of the Ethiopian govern ment for the presence of hunger in that country, there was no mention of the core peripheral relationships in contemporary capitalism which all but insured that developing countries such as Ethiopia would remain in a dependent status (Wallerstein, 1979).
In the fall of 1987, Ethiopia, once again, experienced a severe food crisis. Once again, the attention of the world wasriveted on that country. Also, once again, however, the response of the major industrial countries remained unchanged from that of the earlier crisis. ...