When the WTO's ministerial meeting collapsed in Cancún, Mexico, in September 2003, organizations representing millions of people from around the world hailed the collapse as a victory for their campaigns to stop governments pushing unwanted liberalization and privatization policies upon them.

The groups criticized the U.S. and European Union quest for foreign agricultural markets that is devastating rural peasant and independent family farm-based economies, and driving them off their lands. Since the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect nearly 10 years ago, it has displaced an estimated 1.7 million farmers and farm workers. That is a preview of what will happen globally if the WTO continues its attempt to maintain a stranglehold on agriculture.

The groups also criticized the so-called Group of 20 (formerly the G 21) developing nations, which "although a badly needed political counterweight to the US and the EU, mainly represents exporting interests in the South but does not defend the interests of the large majority of small scale farmers and peasants producing for domestic markets."

The social movements state that current liberalization policies focus on increasing exports that satisfy the needs of corporations and threaten the livelihoods of the poorest. Among others, it asks national governments to protect domestic food production and distribution, and to claim the right to apply these measures as a fundamental human right that cannot be traded-off against other concessions. They cite the People's Food Sovereignty Statement as a viable alternative model for agriculture production and distribution throughout the world that has not been given a fair hearing in trade negotiations or the media.

"Food sovereignty is a common-sense idea that every one can understand. The values embodied in the traditions of farm communities around the world-respect for nature, history, families and neighbors-cannot be measured in dollars or economic efficiency, and should not be sacrificed for the profits of multinational grain traders, processors, and retailers. Without food sovereignty, the promise of democracy is meaningless," stated George Naylor, president of the National Family Farm Coalition.

"Trade negotiators think it acceptable to sacrifice local food production and consumption, and the livelihoods of millions of farmers, in return for increased access to international markets for their main exporters. But social movements around the world claim that control of world's food supply can not and must not lie in the hands of an unaccountable, undemocratic and non-transparent body, such as the World Trade Organization," says Anuradha Mittal of Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy.

The letter states that the main conflict in international trade is not a North-South conflict. It is a conflict between corporate, export orientated agriculture on one hand and on the other hand decentralized, peasant- and family farm-based sustainable production primarily oriented towards domestic markets, in which hundreds of millions need to find an existence.

Included in their letter is a list of suggestions to improve the current international trade system. "An immediate ban on the dumping by all countries would represent an essential step towards increasing the incomes of farmers and peasants around the world, would begin to restore prosperity to rural communities everywhere, and would provide consumers with a safe and affordable food supply that is environmentally sustainable." Says Wenonah Hauter, Director of Public Citizen Energy and Environment Program.

To view the letter, go to http://www.viacampesina.org - under "new"

To view the People's Food Sovereignty Statement, go to: http://www.viacampesina.org/art_english.php3?id_article=34