2025, Brazil, as a major grain exporter, was once again removed from the United Nations' "Global Hunger Map," which means that Brazil's struggle against hunger has once again achieved a stage of success. But this also raises questions: What is the actual situation of food in Brazil? Why, despite being a major grain exporter, does a large number of people still suffer from hunger?
For this, Observers Network connected with João Pedro Stedile, leader of the Landless Workers' Movement (MST) in Brazil, to ask him to observe the impact of this unfair world on Brazil's economy from Brazil's perspective and to look forward to Brazil's reform path.
[Interview/Observer Net: Duanyangyang, Tang Xiaofu; Translation/Observer Net: Duanyangyang]
Observer Net: As the leader of the Brazilian Landless Workers' Movement (MST), you must have a deep understanding of the land issue. In the early days of the Cold War, under the background of communist movements, many third-world countries, including Brazil, experienced a wave of land reforms, but they were not thorough. However, after several decades, Brazil's land reforms have yielded little results, with most of the land still concentrated in the hands of a few. How do you evaluate Brazil's land struggles over the past few decades? How has land concentration exacerbated the country's hunger problem?
José Pedro Stedile: First of all, I need to explain to the readers of Observer Net and the Chinese people: Brazil is the country that experienced the longest period of slavery, lasting 400 years, which left a deep imprint on our society. When we finally freed ourselves from slavery at the end of the 19th century, the most natural thing would have been to distribute land to former slaves - in fact, even the United States did so. But in Brazil, this measure was not implemented, leading to the continuation of social inequality to this day.
Brazil has a long history of plantation economy, with 400 years of slave history
Secondly, as you said, in the 20th century, many countries around the world experienced land reforms driven by industrial bourgeoisie, because the industrial bourgeoisie needed to open up domestic markets for their products. If land reform is implemented and land is distributed to farmers, it will create a vast domestic market to purchase industrial products. However, Brazil only had an industrial bourgeoisie in 1930, and instead of making land reform a priority, they formed an alliance with big landowners. These big landowners continued to focus on coffee, sugar, and beef exports, and still use income from agricultural product exports to fund industrialization processes.
The final result is the current situation: land ownership is highly concentrated. On one hand, only 1% of the rural population, the big landowners, control more than 50% of the land in Brazil, making us the second most land-concentrated country in the world, second only to South Africa. On the other hand, this has created an extremely unequal society. Of Brazil's more than 200 million people, only about 1% are rich, and 90% live in poverty. Even today, as one of the world's largest food producers, there are still 60 million people in Brazil who are food insecure.
Observer Net: You have criticized the neoliberal economic model for exacerbating poverty and hunger in Brazil. In your view, did Lula's government really reverse this trend after Bolsonaro's government? What structural obstacles still exist?
José Pedro Stedile: First of all, it needs to be clarified that Lula's government came to power through a broad coalition defeating right-wing and fascist forces, but this victory was not based on a transformative program. We are still facing long-standing structural problems in the agricultural sector. The reality of Brazil shows that there are three competing agricultural models currently existing.
The first is the exploitative large estate model. Big landowners form alliances with financial capital, specializing in the exploitation of natural resources - they extract minerals, biodiversity resources, forests, water, and land to accumulate wealth, essentially not engaging in production. The second is the agribusiness model. Brazilian capitalist farmers form alliances with international bulk agricultural commodity trading giants and financial capital. The third is the family farming model, where five million small farmer families rely on small plots of land to produce food for the domestic market.
Because some agribusiness interests also support Lula's government, the current agriculture minister even comes from this group, so Lula's election did not change the coexistence of these three models. Although the government has made adjustments in anti-hunger agricultural policies - when Lula took office in January 2023, 30 million Brazilians were hungry every day, and 70 million people faced food insecurity (dietary quality was low, relying on ultra-processed foods, and nutritional needs were not met). Currently, the Lula government has made progress in distribution mechanisms and monthly relief payments, allowing 30 million hungry people to temporarily escape absolute hunger, moving into the food-insecure group, but the problem has not been truly resolved.
The fundamental contradiction lies in the fact that 70 million Brazilians still cannot obtain a diet that meets basic physiological needs. Only when we have enough strength to change the large estate model and the agribusiness model can this problem be solved. This is precisely why we continue to push for land reform, breaking down the large estate system and weakening the agribusiness groups to strengthen the family farming model that focuses on food production.
There are a large number of hungry people in Brazil
Let me give a typical example for Chinese readers: Over the past ten years, Brazil's soybean export volume has increased by 900%, but the production of staple rice and beans has decreased by 30%. With the continuous growth of the population, the supply of staple foods has been declining year after year.
Observer Net: As a major agricultural product exporter, people often mistakenly think that Brazil will not face hunger issues. India, Argentina, and other countries that also export large quantities of agricultural products also face similar difficulties. What do you think is the fundamental reason for this contradiction? How is it related to the structure of the international system? How do you view the impact of the international food market (including genetically modified crops and pesticide dependence) on Brazil's food sovereignty?
José Pedro Stedile: The use of genetically modified seeds and pesticides in Brazilian agriculture is the product of the agribusiness model. International companies that buy soybeans also sell genetically modified seeds and pesticides to farmers - they actually control the entire production chain, which is the essence of the agribusiness model.
This is essentially a mode of operation of international big capital, which has no responsibility to the people and nation of Brazil. The worst consequence of genetically modified crops and pesticides is the destruction of biodiversity in nature, the disruption of climate balance, and the climate change witnessed across the vast territory of Brazil. Here, we used to have extremely rich biodiversity of animals, plants, and microorganisms, but now, under the erosion of genetically modified crops and pesticides, only monocultures of soybeans, cotton, and sugarcane remain, which are causing numerous climate problems in Brazil.
This obviously threatens food sovereignty. Most of Brazil's farmland is used to produce export commodities. 90% of the land in the country is planted with soybeans, corn, sugarcane, or used for cattle grazing, and all these products eventually flow into the international market. If we promote the family farming model that ensures food sovereignty, we could plant 360 types of traditional vegetables to feed the people, but under the international capitalist model, these crops have been marginalized.
Therefore, it can be clearly stated: There is no such thing as "Brazilian agriculture," what we have is an agricultural system dominated by international capital in Brazil. The transnational giants controlling the global agricultural market simply regard our territory as a tool for extracting profits and accumulating wealth.
Observer Net: You mentioned that the agricultural sector is dominated by big capital. Then, do you think that the current production model based on international commodity trade in Brazil differs essentially from the colonial era (such as Argentina, Brazil, and India being forced to produce according to the colonizers' demands)?
José Pedro Stedile: This is a very profound question. Essentially, Brazil has never truly escaped the identity of a colony of international capital. For four centuries, we were a Portuguese colony, with the mission to export coffee, sugar, leather, cocoa, and minerals to Europe. Entering the 20th century, we became to some extent a colony of the United States, and we have never established a truly independent national economy.
This colonial nature is particularly evident in the agricultural sector. For four centuries, the plantation model adopted by commercial capitalism and industrial capitalism in the international capital has always been based on large-scale production units of export-oriented single crops and slave labor. This model was promoted by European commercial capitalism throughout the Global South: Brazil, Latin America, African countries controlled by Britain, France, and the Netherlands, and Southeast Asian regions.
Today's agribusiness model is nothing more than a modernized version of the plantation. The reason it is no longer called "plantation" is simply because the use of slave labor or slavery (such as contract labor in Southeast Asia) has been abolished. From the perspective of production organization, capitalists have merely replaced slave labor with pesticides and large machinery: they use increasingly large modern machinery and pesticides instead of human labor. From the perspective of agricultural technology, this is unnecessary, just to avoid employing labor - capitalists hate paying wages, social security, and fear strikes, while machines and pesticides will never strike.
Brazil's artificial eucalyptus plantations
Observer Net: Do you think Brazil needs more radical reforms to solve the hunger problem, such as expropriating idle land or restricting the monopolies of agribusiness giants?
José Pedro Stedile: Hunger is just the most extreme manifestation of poverty and social inequality. The government can temporarily provide poor families with money to buy food, but this neither solves the problem of poverty, i.e., the basic conditions for a dignified life, nor eliminates the social inequalities we face.
Brazil indeed needs fundamental and profound changes, which can be called a social revolution, like the one China experienced from 1927 to 1949. Our country has attempted radical changes multiple times in history: in 1935, 1953, 1964, and 1989, there were such efforts. But as the Mexicans say: Latin America is too far from God and too close to the United States. The U.S. interest groups always suppress our social reform attempts, even resorting to military coups.
I believe that the solution to the structural problems of 200 million Brazilians will eventually emerge. We still have 70 million workers without formal jobs, 9 million young people aged 16 to 25 who cannot find jobs or get education, and 8 million adult workers who are illiterate. Only through a large-scale mobilization across the country can we achieve a complete transformation. Among all the changes Brazil needs, the most effective way to achieve social equality in the countryside is to implement land reform that guarantees all farmers' families access to land and ecological agriculture.
Observer Net: If the right-wing forces regain power in the future, how should Brazil's left-wing movement protect the existing economic reform achievements? What is your long-term strategy for eliminating hunger in Brazil?
José Pedro Stedile: In the short term, Brazilian people and left-wing forces are striving to push for Lula's re-election in the October 2026 general election. It should be noted that although the right-wing has temporarily lost federal power, it still controls the economy, judiciary, and media. If the right-wing regains federal government, it may trigger social unrest, escalation of violence, and comprehensive uncertainty for the future development.
Therefore, the short-term goal of our people's strength is to ensure Lula's re-election, thus creating a more favorable political environment to organize the people, unite the working class, and accumulate strength for the future. We must engage in dialogue with society, mobilize the working class around what we call the "People's Plan" for a new blueprint of Brazil. Obviously, Brazil does not have the maturity for a social revolution or a socialist revolution in the short term.
But we need to build a program, a proposal for a plan that belongs to the Brazilian people. This plan will aim to eliminate social inequality and create conditions for the future to open up a socialist path with Brazilian characteristics.
Observer Net: As a member of the BRICS Civil Society Council, do you think that BRICS countries (such as China, India, and South Africa) can help Brazil alleviate the problem of hunger in areas such as food security, agricultural technology sharing, or trade policy?
José Pedro Stedile: As I said earlier, solving Brazil's problems of hunger, agricultural model dilemmas, agribusiness monopolies, and control by international capital cannot be done solely through agricultural reforms. Because the ones who control the trade system, commodities, and the whole system are international big capital. In our discussions at the BRICS Civil Society Council, we emphasized that BRICS countries must push for fundamental changes in international economic relations, starting with getting rid of the dollar hegemony.
We must gradually abandon the use of the dollar as an international currency; the dollar should just be the currency of the United States. We need to establish other currency settlement mechanisms, or as President Lula advocated at the BRICS summit, create a new international trade currency. At the same time, we also need to replace the SWIFT system, which is controlled by the United States, and now dominates global capital flows.
On the other hand, BRICS countries must break free from the WTO-imposed free trade framework. International trade should be based on new cooperation rules between countries, so that all countries can benefit, rather than yielding to the interests of multinational corporations that dominate the global market.
BRICS countries should also push for global measures to save the natural ecosystem. We urgently need a global plan (at least implemented in the Global South), carrying out large-scale afforestation. If we do not act immediately, humanity will face a survival crisis, which is not exaggeration. Last summer, 75,000 people died in Europe due to high temperatures, and over the past decade, 700,000 people have died globally due to climate change. Global warming has already exceeded the 1.5°C threshold, and scientists warn that if it rises to 3°C, sea levels will rise and submerge many coastal cities. Most of Brazil's population lives in dangerous coastal areas, and the climate crisis is imminent.
The Brazilian town slowly being swallowed by the sea，《Wall Street Journal》
And every year, the United Nations Climate Conference (COP30 is scheduled to be held in Brazil in November) is just "government tourism," a show for capitalists to profit from carbon credits. BRICS countries' governments have a responsibility to formulate a global vegetation restoration plan and curb the multinational corporations' global monoculture model.
Finally, BRICS countries also need to work together to curb armed conflicts. Under the current capitalist global crisis, the military-industrial complex is turning crises into wars, destroying capital, and eliminating populations to initiate new cycles of capital accumulation. This is the root cause of their inciting the Ukraine war, the Syria war, destroying Libya, and now instigating wars in Palestine, Sudan, and the Congo.
How to stop all this? Only by BRICS countries uniting. We, the Brazilian left-wing forces, and the BRICS civil society council expect BRICS countries' governments to courageously stand up against the United States and NATO, promoting more decisive peace policies. This way, we can save lives, defend peace, and achieve true peace based on developing productive forces and meeting people's basic needs. Now, the United States is asking European countries to allocate 5% of their GDP to military spending. This madness must be stopped.
Observer Net: You mentioned the process of de-dollarization. Considering the relevant discussions by BRICS countries and Russia's proposal for a BRICS currency last year, what kind of picture do you think the future world financial landscape will present?
José Pedro Stedile: This is a very complex issue that requires a complex solution, but the first step must be to promote the de-dollarization of trade in the Global South. The United States has always used the dollar as a tool to exploit the laborers of the Global South. They buy land and factories in Brazil every week with dollars, and these dollars are just paper printed by the Federal Reserve's printing press, ultimately funding the military industry through debt. Therefore, breaking the dollar monopoly is the top priority.
The second step is to establish an alternative to SWIFT. This seems to be a faster solution, essentially just a digital banking system, which does not require a high technical barrier.
The third step is to use local currencies for bilateral trade.
I think that in the future, countries should create a new type of currency, which does not have to be in the form of paper money, nor replace each country's own currency, but serves as a common reference benchmark for all currencies. These are some of the ideas discussed by the BRICS civil society council, but we know that this is extremely complex and requires more investment. I hope that the governments of BRICS countries can quickly form teams of economists from each country and establish a permanent institution to study and design alternative financial solutions to the dollar.
Observer Net: How do you evaluate the cooperation between China and Brazil in the agricultural sector (such as soybean trade)? Besides direct trade, what other cooperation can be expanded in terms of land policy or agricultural production?
José Pedro Stedile: First of all, we must point out that we criticize the growth of soybean and pulp exports to China. We hope that China can gradually achieve self-sufficiency in soybeans and develop its own feed products. Currently, the export of soybeans from Brazil uses the agribusiness model, which is controlled by multinational companies such as Cargill, Bunge, and ADM. Among the five major companies that export soybeans to China, only COFCO, a Chinese company, is present. Therefore, purchasing soybeans from Brazil is actually helping the international capital that controls the global soybean market, not the Brazilian people.
The world's largest pulp mill in Brazil
Similarly, the growth of pulp exports is not beneficial to the Brazilian people, as the large-scale planting of a single species of eucalyptus tree destroys biodiversity, with 500,000 hectares of land covered only by endless eucalyptus plantations, which severely disrupts the rainfall system and climate balance. To export pulp to China, Brazil has built the world's largest pulp mill controlled by multinational companies. We hope that China can use advanced technology to develop alternative packaging materials for pulp.
However, there is a positive side: China can play a key role in helping the Global South eliminate poverty and achieve food sovereignty. Without China's technological support, these goals are difficult for us to achieve.
I believe that the technological achievements accumulated by China should not be redundantly developed, and we look forward to China, based on the socialist values of international cooperation, which are also rooted in the genes of Chinese civilization, to promote technology transfer and help the people of the Global South solve basic needs such as food, clothing, and public transportation.
Now, the car traffic model promoted by the United States in Brazil cannot solve the public transportation problems in Brazilian society. If China can promote high-speed rail technology to the Global South, it will bring fundamental changes to the world. The agricultural sector also needs Chinese experience - China has about 8,000 agricultural machinery manufacturing plants serving small-scale farming, while all of Brazil's agricultural machinery manufacturers are Western enterprises, producing machinery suitable for large farms. We urgently need agricultural machinery suitable for small-scale farming of 1-10 hectares, which is a common demand across Latin America, Africa, and South Asia.
As I mentioned in the case of ecological agriculture, China has a leading advantage in organic fertilizer production technology (such as using fish waste). I had the opportunity to visit the laboratory of China Agricultural University, where its 7-day rapid organic fertilizer technology (which naturally takes 1.5 years) is a revolutionary breakthrough. In Brazil and Latin America, these resources are wasted.
I am full of confidence that China can help Brazil, Latin America, and the entire Global South achieve food sovereignty. I hope that the internationalist spirit advocated by Mao Zedong will continue to inspire the Communist Party of China, which is the mission of Chinese civilization - to help people of all countries get rid of capitalist exploitation.
Observer Net: Finally, two short questions: First, how do you evaluate President Lula? Second, we noticed that you acknowledge China's political development path and mention Mao's policies. What historical experiences do you hope China will share in land reform and workers' and peasants' movements?
José Pedro Stedile: I'll answer the latter question first. China has completed the greatest social revolution in human history, which alone is worth studying worldwide. However, China's experience applies only to China, and people of other countries should not blindly copy other countries' models, but should study and learn from them. However, scientific and technological knowledge has universal applicability. In the current historical stage, China can help the Global South overcome development barriers through technological cooperation (not imposing models). Western enterprises bring technology to exploit, even depriving employment opportunities; while China adheres to the Confucian concept of "win-win," this collaborative model based on public resource investment in scientific research is the foundation of technological cooperation.
Recently, our Landless Workers' Movement wrote to the Chinese ambassador to Brazil, requesting to obtain two types of rice and wheat seeds. One is a drought-resistant rice variety that can reach a yield of 7,000 kilograms per hectare in semi-arid areas. If introduced to Africa and Brazil, this seed could end hunger. Additionally, during my visit to China, I discovered a miniature wheat variety that is only 60 centimeters tall, with a high yield, reaching 7,000 to 8,000 kilograms per hectare. If this variety is promoted, it could solve the food problem in countries that mainly consume wheat. It can be said that these two varieties alone could save the world from famine.
Now, let's talk about the Brazilian issue: Leaders always emerge during the process of people's struggles. In the 20th century, Brazil saw the emergence of the General Secretary of the Brazilian Communist Party, Prestes, whom I once saw the Chinese version of his biography, and I was amazed by the breadth and depth of Chinese culture.
In 1961, then-Vice President Goulart met Mao Zedong during his visit to China
After him, there were Carlos Marighella, Brizola, Goulart, and notably, Goulart once visited China as Vice President and met Mao Zedong.
In recent anti-neoliberal struggles, Lula emerged. There are also many unknown leaders in the states.
Lula is a product of a specific historical stage of mass struggle. His greatest quality is humanitarian compassion, but as he himself said, he is not a traditional left-wing strategic thinker for social change, but a mediator who is good at uniting all sides. In the late stage of his political career, we, the Brazilian people and the left-wing forces, expect new mass movements to emerge to deal with structural contradictions and counter American imperialism. In the new period of struggle, new generations of young and energetic leaders will certainly emerge.
Currently, the primary task of our left-wing movement is to ensure Lula's re-election in 2026, but by the end of his term in 2030, we must cultivate a new generation of fighters, prepare for mass struggles, and promote the construction of an equal society that guarantees the basic rights of every Brazilian person, including work, income, education, culture, and housing.
Finally, I want to say that Eastern wisdom tells us "seeing is believing." I once again express my hope for Chinese friends to come to Brazil for on-site inspections. Please send my sincere greetings.
This article is an exclusive article by Observer Net. The content of the article is purely the author's personal opinion and does not represent the platform's position. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited, otherwise legal liability will be pursued. Follow the Observer Net WeChat account guanchacn to read interesting articles every day.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7553073195243405858/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your attitude by clicking on the [Up/Down] buttons below.