OUR RESPONSE TO THE RESPONSIBLE SOYA PROPOSAL AND TO THE ROUND TABLES
HELD BY AGRI-BUSINESSES AND THEIR COLLABORATORS

We are in no doubt that proposals to produce supposedly sustainable
or responsible Soya are merely an excuse to bring the Agri-business
model to the small producer. They are merely a crude attempt to use
certification as a smokescreen to disguise the policies of large
corporations who keep up appearances through meaningless debate in an
attempt to continue to cover up their global trade. The aim of these
businesses is to gain access to our natural resources, and to assign
us to the role of producers of commodities for export. Through its
complicity with some NGOs and producer organisations, the
Agribusiness model imposed in the 1990s has now taken on an
appearance of responsibility. There is a great deal for them to play
for, and they spare no expense or effort in persuading, buying,
confusing, or even taking over our debates. In these times of Global
Capitalism, Agribusiness can use us, and even consume us, without
exposing itself to any great risk. If they propose a small-scale
version of the same Agro-business model for us, does it matter if the
small producers complain? Can their proposals for Agrarian Reform
make a difference when they know that by continuing with current
production methods all that can take place is that participation in
the new models of colonial dependence will increase?

The Round Tables provide a space for surrender. Without external
consultation, scenarios that go beyond the scope of local development
are played out at these events through spurious negotiations between
the less important members of the corporations and their
collaborators. Inevitably, these round tables we will legitimise the
models that we currently refute, and attempt to make us lose all hope
of achieving our proposals for social justice and food sovereignty.
If they need us to take part in those `responsible' round table
meetings it is because they are closing global deals through
progressive political leadership, because they are advancing in a
time when science is becoming subjugated to the interests of business
and policies for the production of biofuels, and our territories are
being appropriated by investment funds. Soya round tables attempt to
secure captive bioenergy markets for their participants. These
markets will further increase the price of land, and inevitably, the
price of food. Agribusiness and its corporations need to neutralise
any dissident voices or proposals, they need to suffocate any
autonomous or free-thinking reasoning. This may be due to an
intrinsic fragility of the agribusiness model in the midst of the
climatic changes the energy crisis we are currently experiencing.

This global model does not support those who do not participate in
its production and consumption network. It does not support those
that exist at the margins of its food and agriculture industry, and
is even less supportive of those who refuse to legitimise them in any
way and continue to campaign against their policies. We are proud to
be part of those men and women who will not give in to the Agro-
industry and this new global subservience. We faced them during the
Counter-conference at Iguazú in March 2005, at which so-called
environmentalists, the agribusinesses and the grain producers united
to share out the plunder from the Soya Republics between themselves.
We will challenge them again as many times as is necessary to reclaim
a sovereign Argentina, one which is free from corporations and global
markets. Our statement at Iguazú is still relevant today:

WHERE MONOCULTURES EXIST THERE CAN BE NO SUSTAINABILITY. WHERE
AGRIBUSINESS EXISTS THERE CAN BE NO CAMPESINOS.

GRR Grupo de Reflexión Rural, Argentina


February 2008 www.grr.org.ar