In a world of great-power standoffs, climatic tipping points, and technological arms races, global hunger may not seem like a particularly significant problem. Yet last year, a total of 2.1 billion people, or more than a quarter of the planet’s population, experienced food insecurity—meaning they either ran out of food over the course of a year or were forced to reduce the quality or quantity of their diet. Over 260 million faced acute food insecurity, meaning their lives or livelihoods were in immediate danger because they could not get enough to eat. Almost a quarter of all children under the age of five were permanently stunted because of malnourishment and will likely reach lower levels of education, earn less over the course of their lives, and live with more chronic health challenges than properly fed kids. And these startling figures do not reflect the food crises that could be unleashed this year by rising energy and fertilizer prices, decreases in grain exports from Russia and Ukraine, and an intensifying El Niño weather pattern.

Food insecurity is terrible in and of itself. But it also has disastrous political consequences. It inhibits economic growth, heightens the risk of violent conflict, and destabilizes governments. These problems, in turn, create trouble for the whole world. That means countries that are not overwhelmed by food insecurity still have strong, self-interested reasons to tackle it—the United States included.

In fact, a U.S.-led effort to address hunger would do more than create a healthier and more stable planet. Given the waning goodwill toward the United States, Washington needs an agenda through which it can rebuild global confidence in its leadership and demonstrate the value of international cooperation. Addressing global food security could be at the center of such a plan. Different parts of the world, after all, may have different geopolitical ambitions. But almost no government—northern or southern, democratic or autocratic—wants to see so many people go hungry. There may be no better way to rebuild confidence in the liberal world order and in the United States as a committed member of it than for Washington to address this challenge.

It is difficult to overstate just how intertwined food security is with global development, state security, and even international competition. Malnutrition leads to reduced educational attainment, compromised human capital, and lost productivity, costing the world economy $3.5 trillion a year in forgone economic growth and in added health-care costs. Food price spikes can also exacerbate grievances and lead to riots that destabilize governments; anger over hunger, for example, set the conditions for the Arab Spring protests. In rural areas, food insecurity helps armed groups recruit soldiers and causes disputes over scarce land and water resources. And it causes people to migrate to wealthier states.

These reasons are, by themselves, enough for Washington to helm a global campaign to reduce hunger. But so should the fact that leading on global food security means helping shape the future of the world’s entire agricultural system—something China is on a path to do. In 2019, Beijing invested significant capital in securing leadership of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, a role with substantial influence over how governments work together on food-related issues. It is also quickly developing other ways to lead the world on matters of food security. China spends double what the United States spends on public agricultural research and development, and its output of agricultural patents........

© Foreign Affairs