There is a belief that countries should make an effort to meet the dietary needs of their population with locally produced food and import food much less. I do not agree with this opinion because of the undeniable and inseparable role of food imports.
The idea that countries should forego importing food and support domestic food production may stem from reducing costs. Often, foreign food prices might experience hikes that compel trade partners to raise prices in the domestic market, resulting in people finding it difficult to cover expenses on food. If Kazakhstan, a Central Asian country supplying its neighbors, specifically Uzbekistan, with meat products, decides to double the price tag, the partners might witness a period of financial instability. Yet had there been sufficient domestic meat production in those countries, they would not have had such a heavy reliance.
As convincing as this argument seems, it does not account for how deeply importation of food is embedded in many countries’ economy. Some nations cannot opt out of buying food from abroad anymore because their economy is interconnected to those of food-exporting countries. The Middle Eastern countries are a pertinent case in point; not only can they not produce a sufficient amount of agricultural products domestically, but they also can not substantially reduce food imports, which would disrupt food chains and thus lower food security. Even if there are some alternatives like modern agricultural techniques, they cannot change the fact that those countries are climatically challenged.
In conclusion, I believe that a reduction in food imports to foster domestic food production is not justifiable. This is because it would entail severe knock-on effects, ranging from disrupted food chains to lower food security.