World peace or solve world hunger

World peace. Because that would allow for more focus on world hunger and other humanitarian issues.

That's quite contradictory.

World peace

The money saved from the lack of funding war and weapons both militaristic and nuclear might help the hunger situation, also, a lot of the hunger is not to do with lack of money for food, it's political, some of the countries with the highest rates of starvation also have some of the richest governments in the world, now I'm inferring here, but I'm assuming that world peace means that such government cruelty and corruption is no longer a problem

Difficult choice.
World peace means many more people needing to be fed each day.
Ending hunger means stronger and healthier killers, who kill more efficiently.
Neither is an acceptable choice, alone.

World peace would require world hunger to be solved also, by definition.