FOOD PROBLEM IN THE THIRD WORLD 15 was not a central preoccupation of the economists, nor was development applicable to Third World countries until a short while ago. In fact, the Third World was 'discovered^ only after World War II—not because the developed capitalist countries became conscious of it, but because of the enormous pressure exerted by the poor nations for recognition of their rights to have a bigger share of their own wealth. The processes which have led to the political independence of many countries, particularly in Asia and Africa, and the concessions that the colonial powers were forced to make, have not helped to ease the pressure which poor countries exert to obtain even bigger advantages. On the contrary, this pressure has increased. Their massive membership of the UN has been a catalytic factor in starting the debate on development after World War II: development, but not social change, or at most social changes which will not affect the basic dependency relations between the centre and the periphery. Impact of Revolutionary Changes Of course, here and there, in various continents, nations were forced to rebel in order to achieve the political independence which was still denied them. Their objective was to achieve their right to self-determination, to make their own choice regarding the path of economic development, as was the case of Cuba in Latin America, China and Vietnam in Asia, and Algeria and Angola in Africa. Obviously, these developments acted as catalysts in producing a chain of concessions made to those nations which, although not yet 'contaminated', could be potential followers of these undesirable examples. Concessions were mainly in the form of finance for or partnership with local elites in enterprises or development projects; sometimes, when it was considered necessary, they were made through the promotion of certain structural changes which would ease tension without affecting the essence of its foundation, and above all without endangering the dependence on the metropoles. One of the most illustrative examples is the impact that the Cuban revolution has had on the policy of the United States towards Latin America. Long before that revolution, there was in Latin America a growing aspiration for land reforms which would put an end to the persistence of latifundia, would benefit the landless peasants and small landowners, and would remove the main obstacle to solving the contin< ent's chronic food deficit. This aspiration was violently condemned and repressed by the governments of those countries, strongly influenced by the representatives of the big landowners. The condemnation had the blessing of the US, since many American firms were owners of major plantations mainly devoted to the production of sugar and bananas, especially in the Caribbean and in Central America. Nevertheless, the idea of land reform was virtually legalized in