MST leader: We do not accept collars from the Lula government – 04/27/2023 – Power

The MST (Landless Rural Workers Movement) is at a crossroads.

The most important entity fighting for agrarian reform in Brazil has regained influence and channels of dialogue with the return to power of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT), a historic ally.

On the other hand, it faces an offensive that includes pressure from agribusiness linked to former president Jair Bolsonaro (PL) and the creation of a CPI to investigate the movement and land invasions, whose request was read this Wednesday by the president of the Chamber of Deputies, Arthur Lira (PP-AL).

In an interview with Sheet By videoconference, MST national coordinator João Paulo Rodrigues takes stock of the movement’s mobilization actions during the so-called Red April, denies that there has been a change in the movement’s tactics under Lula and reaffirms its autonomy in relation to the government.

The Chamber of Deputies mobilized around the creation of the CPI of the MST, an initiative that was repeated in Legislative Assemblies. fear this offensive? The right will use the federal parliament and the Legislative Assemblies across the country to confront the MST. Along with this there is their media, fake news and the armed militias of shooting clubs and CACs [Colecionadores, Atiradores Desportivos e Caçadores]. It’s a demonic mix.

This CPI [na Câmara] it is preemptive about the future. It is not about the past because there is no fact that justifies it. Our actions are within the framework of democracy. If Congress reaffirms this CPI, it will be political persecution. We are going to sue the Federal Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional.

Is the creation of the CPI a sign of abandonment by the government? Either Lula has a weak base in Congress? I believe that the government is weak in the National Congress. PT, PSOL, PC do B and PSB are going to fight not to have the CPI, they are going to put up a good fight against the landlordism and the defense of the MST. We must not be afraid of the right. We have already gone through four CPIs, and the MST came out the strongest of all of them. The CPI is unnecessary and does not accumulate for the democratic debate in Brazil.

Land invasions by the MST during Red April irritated the government and should delay the resumption of agrarian reform policies. Was the strategy the right one? The journey had four major objectives. The first was to move our social base after the Bolsonaro government. The second was to deal with agrarian reform in society and, for better or for worse, the theme returned to the agenda. The third component was occupations. We made a much smaller number so as not to have clashes with the landowners or want to provoke the right. Finally, there were the negotiations with the government. We move forward, create negotiation channels. But the government has not made any announcements so far. This frustrated our base.

There was a strong government reaction to the invasion of land by Suzano and Embrapa. What is the purpose of these occupations? Don’t they go against the MST discourse of occupying only unproductive areas? There were protests. In Espírito Santo, Suzano occupies public land owned by the government that should be used for agrarian reform. In the case of Embrapa, there are 2,000 hectares that have been abandoned for over six years. We are questioning the State about federal government lands that are unproductive. It is unreasonable that the Army has 18,000 hectares in the Petrolina region for horseback riding, that Codevasf has 15,000 hectares around the São Francisco River being occupied by large estates.

Embrapa alleges that that area is used for seedling and seed development research. We challenge Embrapa to show what research they have in that area.

There was some change in the pressure tactics of the federal government at the beginning of the Lula government compared to the Jair government Bolsonaro? Nothing has changed. The MST significantly reduced the number of occupations in this first semester because we are in the beginning of the government and we don’t want to create political tension. It caught my attention how the government was induced by the press to think that the MST had gone back to carrying out mega-occupations, which in practice did not happen.

With an allied government, invasions and protests are again tool of pressure? The MST always works with the same forms of struggle: occupation of unproductive areas, protests and actions to call the attention of the authorities. It worries me that the government and sectors of society think that the MST is no longer occupying land to be a large movement of cooperatives and rice production. The struggle for land is central to the strategy of the MST, we cannot abandon it.

But Lula himself he spoke at campaign, in an interview with Jornal Nacional, that the MST of 30 years ago no longer exists. He is right. In the first year of the Lula government, we occupied 270 large estates. This year, we occupied 14. But in the first Lula administration we didn’t have organic rice, we didn’t have a cooperative. Now we have it, but we haven’t changed the actions of the struggle for land. We want the Lula government to take action, expropriate large estates and settle the 60,000 camped families. The forecast for this year is to settle 6,000 families. If this pace continues, we will need three mandates to settle only the families that are camped. There’s no way to work like that.

Is this ‘new face’ of the MST, focused on the production of organic food, lost when the invasions come to the fore? Isn’t there a loss from an image point of view? It’s a shame if that happens. The MST was built and is still alive today not because it was a food producer or a large NGO, but because it was a movement fighting for land. We cannot take care of the MST’s image under penalty of agrarian reform not being implemented. There is no way to produce food on an apartment balcony, the food that is produced depends on land. And the MST is very careful to act within the margins of the Constitution. If the farms are productive and respect the laws, there is no reason for farmers to be worried.

The MST stood by Lula in the most difficult moments, including Lava Jato and the elections. Does the movement see itself as a creditor of the president? No way. Lula has no debt to the MST and neither does the MST have any debt to Lula. We will defend the Lula government at all times, we are not hesitant about this aspect. The government is ours, we help build it. But the MST has autonomy in relation to the PT and the government. We are not a transmission belt [do governo] and we do not accept any type of collar or muzzle about the organization of the MST.

Do you see the ingratitude of the government and the PT command towards the causes of the MST? The government made a political mistake in not meeting our agenda. But it’s not up to us to say what the government has to do. We claim. In my assessment, the government did not like the actions of the MST and must have asked in internal conversations: “Let’s put the MST in the corner of thought, then we’ll take care of them”. I imagine that it is not a decision by Lula, but by the ministers of the government bureaucracy. It is a pity because those who behaved as not to negotiate with the MST in land occupation were others.

Farmers organized themselves in several states and reacted to possible land invasions, including the use of weapons. Does that worry you? The Brazilian right was organized by Bolsonaro and received money, infrastructure and a secret budget to have a deputies, communication and organization machine. It is natural to come out strengthened. The question is who will have the support of society. Our model of agriculture preserves the environment, does not use pesticides and takes care of people. Agribusiness produces poison, deforestation and the sale of soybeans for export. Society will define which model it wants for future generations.

Do you think it is possible to dialogue with agribusiness? It’s possible. We even authorize the President [da Câmara] Arthur Lira arranging meetings with the agricultural group to see what it is possible to have on a common agenda. It has an agribusiness that is serious, that produces and respects environmental laws. The MST has the maturity to respect those who produce food. Now, with land grabbers, with killers of Indians, with those who deforest and produce slave labor, we don’t want to talk.

The MST demands the dismissal of Incra leaders appointed in the Bolsonaro government. Is there a demand for government positions? The MST has no individual claims. The nominations in the states were under the command of federal and state deputies. The MST, along with other rural movements, helped build consensus around some names.

A cousin of Arthur Lira and an ally Davi Alcolumbre still remain in the Incras, remnants of the Bolsonaro government. Will the MST keep pressing? In Alagoas, there is no way to maintain it because the guy is dangerous, he is a foreman, he walks around armed in the settlements. If the government decides that the nomination is from Arthur Lira, we will respect it. But we don’t want to continue this current superintendent.

Which agrarian reform demands of the 1st and 2nd Lula governments does the MST expect to be fulfilled in this third government? The government needs a four-year plan that focuses on food production and respect for the environment. This requires land, credit, agroindustry, seeds, biofertilizers and a fair trade policy. Brazil has 200 million hectares of unproductive arable land. This land has to be used to produce food and can serve small farmers, settlers and large producers. It cannot be for soybean production for export or for real estate speculation.

---

X-RAY | Joao Paulo Rodrigues, 43

Born in Nova Londrina (PR), he grew up in São Paulo and is a land reform settler in Pontal do Paranapanema. He is a farmer, trained in social sciences and member of the national leadership of the MST (Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra).