Rising temperatures, changing soil salinity, increasing instances of drought, and other events related to climate change profoundly influence food production as well as physical and economic access to food. Climate change is, therefore, often linked to global hunger. The question of how to feed the world has become more pressing in the face of climate change and a variety of narratives respond to this question. Genetically engineering seeds so that crops can cope with adverse climatic conditions has been proposed as a way to address hunger. While some corporations, scientists, and policymakers promote so-called climate-ready seeds as valuable means through which to feed the world, others, especially food-rights advocates and civil society organizations, fiercely reject climate-ready seeds. This chapter introduces two narratives of hunger, the neoliberal narrative and the food sovereignty narrative. Drawing on food regime theory as an analytical tool, I study these two narratives through debates about climate-ready seeds that reveal the points of contention between them. The neoliberal narrative reflects the dominant neoliberal features of the current global food regime, such as the importance of free markets and intellectual property rights in supporting agricultural production; climate-ready seeds exemplify the neoliberal narrative. The food sovereignty narrative, in contrast, seeks to view food as a right, not as a commodity. This narrative is told by those opposed to the neoliberal food regime; resistance against climate-ready seeds exemplifies it. The focus of this investigation is specifically on the role that international law plays in constructing these narratives of hunger. How is international law relevant in telling (convincing) stories about how to feed the world in times of climate change? International law is understood as a language; this study examines not only legal texts emanating from states, but also the legal discourse used by a variety of actors. The conclusion of this chapter introduces what I call the pyramid of assumptions. The neoliberal narrative and the food sovereignty narrative are commonly presented as contradictory stories of how to feed the world. However, both narratives depend on a shared set of fundamental assumptions that I analyze and represent as a pyramid. Further, this book argues that the way in which international law is framed discourages critics from questioning these assumptions through legal discourse.