Some people believe that countries should produce the food to feed their population themselves and import as little as possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In the view of some, countries’ food production must be independent for the security reasons. However, I completely disagree with this opinion since regions all over the world do not have the same weather conditions and equally fertile soil. The first reason why I disagree with the supporters of food security is that countries’ geography varies. While some places are suitable for growing all types of crops all year round, others are not. Northern regions, such as Canada or Norway, for instance, have a severe climate; hence, they cannot grow food throughout the year. If such countries had refused to import foreign produce, their citizens would have never known the taste of bananas, pineapples and coconuts. It follows that the only solution that will allow governments to provide population with food at all times is importing groceries. Another essential point is that some countries have limited land resources, so sufficient harvests might not be achievable for them. Although countries need developed agriculture and food processing facilities in the case of wars, sanctions or economic blockade, nowadays, most countries live in peace or have loyal allies. Even if there is a small chance of getting into hard times, governments could quickly build new plants and factories to restore the shortage of food supply. To illustrate, the recent economic blockade of Qatar was easily withstood despite the lack of fertile soil and poor agricultural industry thanks to the help of Turkey, India and China. Thereby, healthy trade relations with other nations are a must for any country. To conclude, I totally disagree with the idea of restricting food market regulations. Not only do climate conditions prevent such an independence, but poor soil also does not allow most countries to become self-sufficient.