Genesis and Role of the Peasant Movement in Mozambique

Diamantino Nhampossa

Mozambique’s struggle for independence was only made possible by the participation of

peasants in the fight against the colonial fascist regime that was ruling. In the colonial period,

peasants constituted an ‘unlimited supply for labour’ for the colonial regime and were subject

to cruel acts of colonial exploitation (including slavery, hard labour, racism, torture,

assassination and rape). For this reason, peasants longed for full and authentic liberation to

maximise control over their lives. There were, however, black elites – notably black middle

class employees – in the country who benefited from the softer side of colonization and who,

under the ‘assimilation’ system, longed to enjoy full rights as Portuguese citizens after

denying their own culture and origin. This class of people did not desire radical change to the

colonial system.

Following independence in 1975, peasants (and workers) were initially at the core of

economic transformation policies, as a new nation rose based on principles of justice and

equality. The rise of neo-liberalism though has subsequently undermined transformation.

Modern thinkers have overwhelmingly regarded the peasantry as an historical anachronism or

as a receding baseline of development (Borras Jr et al. 2008, 37-39) but such analyses have

failed to recognize that most successful revolutions in the modern world have come from

lower classes. The failure of the socialist revolution and the apparent success of neo-liberal

capitalism over the former in Mozambique raise innumerable questions on about the right

path to follow in the struggle against poverty and exclusion. Importantly, what is the

contemporary political role of a peasant movement?

One of the biggest challenges of revolutionary processes is to maintain the initial

momentum. The successes obtained by strong organization and discipline in the high

moments of past struggles in Mozambique have not been consolidated. Thus, the peasantry

needs to reorganize itself permanently, adopt new strategies, build new alliances and remain

faithful. Considering that representative democracy has failed to consistently fulfil the

demands of the majority, the rising and renewal of critical social movements – with vision

and alternatives – is crucial. Nevertheless, is it possible to build a strong, autonomous and

critical peasant movement in Mozambique today?

This chapter seeks tentative answers to the questions posed above as understood

historically. Many of the issues addressed reoccur in struggles of the peasantry and remain

controversial. Therefore, the arguments formulated are not self-contained truths but seek to

enrich the debate in a manner that contributes to advancing peasant struggles in Mozambique.

Mozambique’s Independence

From 1962 to 1974, the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO) succeeded,

against all odds, in putting an end to Portuguese colonial rule. On independence, socialism is

adopted as the economic-political system for rebuilding the nation. The economy is based on

central planning and controlled by the State, with land, industry, services and banking all

being nationalised. In response to this, a sixteen-year civil war financed by the West through

the apartheid state was waged against the FRELIMO government; this, along with local

corruption and the weakening of the socialist bloc globally, led the country into bankruptcy

by the mid-1980s. In this context, the Mozambican government under President Samora

Machel turned to the West for alternative solutions, which led to liberalisation of the

economy and polity with the assistance of the Bretton Woods institutions. A peace agreement

was signed in 1992 (between FRELIMO and the apartheid-backed RENAMO), ending the

civil war. The first democratic multiparty elections were held in 1994, with FRELIMO

subsequently winning every national contest against RENAMO, now the largest opposition

party. Impressive economic growth has resulted and the prevalence of poverty has lowered

from 69% in 1997 to 54 % in 2003 (Ministry of Planning and Finance 2004, Norfolk et al.

2006).

Indeed, sustained by strong foreign investment, real GDP has grown at rates in excess

of seven percent for the last four consecutive years, following the severe economic setback

caused by the devastating floods in 2000. This growth has been driven by new ‘mega

projects’ (such as aluminum smelters and a gas pipeline to South Africa), investment from

neighboring countries, buoyant donor support and agricultural growth. During this period,

there was fast expansion in the tourism, construction and manufacturing sectors. As well,

there was a remarkable agricultural “catch-up” – the civil war had succeeded in stopping

most agricultural activities in the rural areas, and now agriculture started to occupy its space

as the most important activity in the country. The agricultural sector continues to support

nearly seventy percent of the economically active population, whereas the service sector

(including government) employs fifteen percent of the workforce and industry only five

percent. Agriculture also provides major export earnings from commodities such as prawns

and fish, cotton, sugar, timber and raw cashew nuts.

This growth however has been expressed in uneven development, with extreme

wealth differences between the rich and poor (the latter concentrated in the rural areas and in

many suburbs of the main cities). To both the World Bank and UNICEF, a ‘paradox’ exists,

asking for instance – how can poverty be falling while chronic child malnutrition is rising in

Mozambique? At the top are seven to fifteen percent of Mozambicans with considerable

assets and/or top-rate employment who have been able to take advantage of the market

forces. At the bottom is half of the Mozambican population: unable to properly feed their

children, marginalized by the market and sinking deeper into poverty. In the middle is an

insecure group, rising and falling according to the vagaries of the market and their health, and

desperately trying to stay out of poverty (Hanlon 2007).

Genesis of the National Peasant Union - UNAC

The struggle for independence could never have been possible if peasants had not understood

the value of freedom, not just for their home village but the whole nation under exploitation.

The leaders of FRELIMO in the 1960s joined hands with communities living in the rural

areas to start and carry on the revolutionary process which culminated in the seizure of the

colonial state. The revolutionary Government that led the destiny of the new nation

considered the peasants to be at the core of rural development. In 1977 the Government

launched a programme named ‘Collectiv(ize) the countryside’ (colectivização do campo).

The programme consisted of two main pillars, that is, considering state-owned companies as

the dominant productive sector and building the cooperative sector (Castel-Branco 1994).

The state overtook almost all abandoned property, especially companies and processing units

for agricultural products in the rural areas. Cooperatives were designed to reduce poverty

through improved forms of production and facilitate people’s access to government social

services. This was however a very painful process since most of the people who joined a

cooperative or association, or moved into a communal village, were not properly consulted.

The ‘Colectivização do Campo’ programme brought a new dynamic into the rural

areas due to the high increase in the number of associations and cooperatives, as created by

decree. Some of these organizations benefited from state support in terms of inputs,

technology and facilitation in the commercialization process. The state had a development

bank (People’s Development Bank) that facilitated financial services for the most successful

organizations. The Cereal Institute (of Mozambique) also played an important role in buying

farmers surplus for processing and export.

The programme did not bring the results expected due to a number of factors, some of

which were inherited from the political and economical structure left by the colonial regime.

Peasants had neither the social and political experience nor organizational and managerial

skills that would enable them to develop the cooperative movement. Nevertheless, there was

a great political push from FRELIMO to advance a policy that would correct the inequalities

left by the fascist colonial regime. Although it was directed to socialist transformation of the

countryside, the ‘Colectivização do Campo’ programme did not solve the systemic problem

of the nature of production and commercialization in the rural areas. It simply managed to

change the centre of accumulation form the colonial and multinational capitalist sector to

state companies, without changing the inherited structure and social relations in production

(Castel-Branco 1994).

In addition, the FRELIMO government promoted civil society structures for policy

dialogue that were named “Masses’ Democratic Organizations”1. These organizations

touched most of the social spheres of society and facilitated the relationship between the

Sate/Party and society. These included OMM: Women, OTM: Workers, OCRM: Children,

OJM: Youth, and ONP2: Teachers. These organizations played an important role in the

dissemination and implementation of the socialist ideology, and in the social and political

control of the masses. Surprisingly, despite the size of the peasantry, FRELIMO did not

create a peasant organization. The ‘Colectivização do Campo’ programme was focused

primarily on peasants but it did not result in a peasant movement until later.

The negotiations between the Mozambique Government and the Bretton Woods

institutions, after Samora Machel’s visit to White House in 1984, marked the first steps

1 This is a literal translation from Portuguese of “Organizações Democráticas de Massa”. 2 OMM – Organização da Mulher Moçambicana/Mozambique Womens Organization, OTM – Organização dos

Trabalhadores Moçambicanos/Mozambique Workers Organization, OCRM – Organização dos Continuadores

da Revolução Moçambicana/Organization of Children who will Continue Mozambique Revolution, OJM –

Organização da Juventude Moçambicana/Organization of Mozambique Youth, ONP – Organização Nacional de

Professores/ National Teachers Organization.

towards economic reforms in the country. In becoming a member of the World Bank and

IMF, the government back tracked on a number of existing political and economic measures.

In 1987 Mozambique received an initial US $45 million to kick-start the economic reforms

under the SAP (Structural Adjustment Programme) (The World Bank Group in Mozambique,

2007). The country has undergone the standard macro-economic stabilization package

(Toussaint 2006), including the devaluation of local currency and the increase of interest rates

– this resulted in a collapse of credit3 for agriculture and industry. The government was also

forced to reduce the public budget, which affected operational and development spending.

Price liberalization was implemented and this was the main reason for the collapse and

weakening of the complex grain system, including the existing commercialization network.

These measures have succeeded in cutting off small farmers’ linkages with the market

(formal and informal), and eliminating all the benefits (such as subsidies) that cooperatives

and state-firms were getting from the government. The SAP liberalised trade and the banking

system, and even privatized many state-owned firms (including industries such as textile,

cashew, tea and coconut). Attempts to privatize land and promote land titling were however

unsuccessful4.

These events triggered the birth of the national peasant platform. The existing

cooperative movement organized a national conference in April 1987 whose main agenda

was to discuss how peasants, their organizations and families would survive under the new

conjuncture. This conference was convened by UGC (General Union of Cooperatives of

Maputo) the biggest cooperative movement in the country. UGC consisted of eighty-five first

tier cooperatives (poultry producers) and three second tier cooperatives (involving input

supplies, financial services, processing and commercialization). The union had nearly five

thousand members with 95% of them women. This union, as well as other unions like the

union of Chimoio, General Union of Cooperatives of Nampula, union in Tete and various

associations and cooperatives located throughout the country (entailing over 1000 community

based organizations), had benefited from a range of services provided by government at

different levels. Such services were discontinued due to the large-scale adoption of the

neoliberal policies.

Besides leaders of the peasant movement, various high-profile personalities were

invited to the conference, including the Prime Minister, academics and NGOs. The

discussions highlighted the new political-economic context under neo-liberalism and the long

list of conditions that the country had to accept in order to benefit from loans offered by

multilateral financial institutions and other donors. The end of the one party-state and

liberalization of the economy received particular attention. These changes reshaped the nature

of civil society participation in the policy process. Civil society would no longer be

3 Mozambique’s development bank (BPD) played an important role in providing credit to small farmers, and to

producer and consumer cooperatives in urban and rural areas. This bank was privatized during the neo-liberal

reforms and is now owned by Barclays. 4 A Constitutional Clause from 1990 states: ‘The land is the property of the State and cannot be sold or

otherwise alienated, mortgaged or encumbered’. This clause was confirmed during the Constitutional revision in

2004. The Land Law was approved in 1997, with massive participation of peasants and civil society

organizations. Today it remains as one of the biggest achievements of the peasant movements. The government

has recently reiterated that it has ruled out, as a matter of fundamental policy principle, making land fully

tradable in rural areas. That however remains a challenge due to the State’s bias towards commercial

agriculture.

understood as simply mimicking and implementing decisions made within the ruling Party,

but would stand – at least in theory – as independent non-political actors seeking political

change without siding with specific party-political forces.

The April 1987 conference addressed the need for establishing a national peasant

forum whose one objective would be to represent peasants and their organizations in policy

design, implementation and monitoring and, secondly, to develop and propose an alternative

model suitable for peasant farmers’ families in the context of the threat posed by neoliberal

policies. An interim commission was established whose objective was to set the ground for

the creation of a Union. This commission operated from April 1987 to April 1993. This

commission played an important role in coordinating the participation of the peasantry in the

Constitutional Revision in the late 1980s5. The neoliberal policies necessitated changes to the

Constitution, to allow for a number of conditionalities imposed by the multilateral

institutions. The interim commission firmly stood against the privatization of land by

assuring the maintenance of the constitutional clause as stated in its original version, which in

essence still remains the same after the last constitutional revision in 2004. Based on the work

of the commission, the Constitutive Assembly of UNAC took place in 1993 when the first

Statutes and the Programme of the new Union were approved.

As stated earlier, the peasant movement was not created during the revolutionary

period unlike many other mass organizations. UNAC members commonly consider this fact

an important one for the shaping of an independent and critical peasant movement. All the

organizations that were created under the auspices of the FRELIMO during revolutionary

times are, today, structures of the Party and, being so, are under control of the higher

structures of the Party. This alone reduces their chances of vigorously bringing forth issues of

their interest especially when they differ from the position of the party. Being an independent

movement, UNAC has the potential of taking independent positions and, therefore, of

representing better the interests of the peasantry. The independence of the movement from

political parties, particularly from the ruling party, becomes even more important especially

with the rise of rich elites in the party who benefited from the renewed capitalism under cover

of the SAP.

The motivations that underlie the creation of a peasant movement in Mozambique are

not different from the ones that triggered the liberation struggle in the mid-1960s. Capitalism

was once again entrenching itself in the country but now cleverly disguised in processes such

as globalization, liberalization and privatization, all seemingly in the name of prosperity. It

was clear once again to the peasants, though, that this change would bring forth old-standing

issues of class struggle, exploitation and marginalization of the poor, which in essence were

not substantially different from the ones under the colonial system. Seeking justice, equality

and solidarity for all regardless of all differences, remain important motivations for the

movement’s struggle as a way of continuing the revolutionary history of the country.

Vision, Objectives, Strategies and Tactics

5 A New Constitution of the Republic of Mozambique was approved in 1990.

An equitable and prosperous society is the vision that sustains the UNAC’s existence.

Although most camponeses (peasants) are inextricably linked to the agricultural sector, the

movement’s struggle is not confined to this sector. Its mission entails a definition of

camponeses which tries to change the historic weight carried by this term. The word

camponeses, coming from a Western language, carries with it a pejorative meaning which has

to do with the history of Europe; camponeses were taken as backward, particularly in relation

to the urban populations. Without this pejorative meaning, the term would primarily mean

people (families) living in the countryside with social and economic relations that bring them

closer to nature (and which they protect), hence designating a harmonious and sustainable

coexistence between humankind and environment. In this light, the vision of UNAC pursues

deep changes in all spheres of society (social, economic, political) that overcome the legacies

of colonialism and neo-liberalism, and seeks an inclusive world where all humankind enjoy

live with dignity. A better world is seen as possible when camponeses participate in society

as full citizens and agents of change, guided by the deepest values of humanity.

Since the beginning, UNAC has guided its actions according to three main objectives.

The first objective is strengthening peasants’ organizations. Although to be a member of

UNAC farmers are not required to be members of associations or cooperatives (or other

forms of traditional organizations), these are an important basis for increasing the peasants’

capacity to face challenges in the rural areas. Community-based organizations are not new to

peasants in Mozambique and Africa in general. In many communities in Mozambique,

human existence is closely linked to participating and belonging, as reflected in the phrase “I

participate therefore I am”. Many of the local organizations that are linked to UNAC are

traditional farmer organizations (with their own values and practices), and these organizations

are strengthened through leadership training, as well as by dissemination of information

about basic principles underlying association and cooperative building. These processes

allow farmers to increase the level of transparency and democracy in the organizations.

A second key objective is policy dialogue and participation. Before 1987,

participation in formulating national policy was done through structures of the revolutionary

Party. Arguably there was no political pluralism in the early years, but in reality there was

more participation of the people in the decision making processes compared to today. With

the advent of the SAPs and later PRSPs (Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers), it was claimed

that civil society had greater space to participate; but these neo-liberal policies were

effectively produced by hired consultants (generally foreign, and written in a language which

most could not read) who did not know the specific realities of Mozambique and adopted a

one size fits all approach. Under these circumstances, the role of social movements became

crucial. UNAC used its structures in grassroots and other levels to push for Food Sovereignty

as an alternative to the agricultural model proposed by neoliberal policies. Besides taking

advantage of workshops and seminars organized by government, UNAC as a founding

member of two6 civil society platforms advocating for sound participation in policy design,

implementation and monitoring, was able to intervene in countering the neo-liberal influence.

In most cases though UNAC – as a legitimate representative of peasants – raises concerns 6 These two groups are Mozambique Debt Group (GMB), a platform of civil society organizations existing since

1997 that fights against foreign debt; and G20, a group of non-state actors formed in 2007 whose objective is to

produce a yearly parallel report on poverty reduction using participatory methods, and to prepare members to

participate in the Poverty (Development) Observatory, at which civil society meets with government and

donors.

related to its rural membership, and has increasingly conquered space for dialogue with

government and parliament. In order to raise the awareness of society and attract the attention

of decision makers, including bilateral and multilateral donors7, the movement organizes

rallies at least once a year (17th of April) at local or national levels.

The third objective is to enhance peasants’ capacity to produce or to use land for food

sovereignty. Organizational development and policy dialogue are important steps in

accomplishing food sovereignty. However, it is not enough to be organized to fight for what

is right; it is equally crucial that peasants strengthen their capacity to produce goods which

are necessary for the community’s needs. Most land in Mozambique remains in the hands of

small farmers but, due to lack of adequate support, they are producing only fifty percent of

the country’s food needs. Government support is not the only way to overcome this problem;

there is knowledge, experience and resources amongst the peasantry that could be used to

reverse the situation. Most famers in Mozambique practice sustainable family-based

agriculture and multi-functionality is taken as the yardstick to protect, respect and guarantee

adequate food for the community. Training of farmers, farmer-to-farmer exchanges,

development of seed banks and cultural celebrations are some of the strategies used to

recover and enhance sustainable approaches to production amongst peasants. Cross-border

partnership with organizations that focus on sustainable agriculture and agro-ecology

(including ATC-Kenya, ANAP-Cuba, MST-Brazil) has been important in bringing new

approaches and experiences to revitalise indigenous knowledge in agriculture.

Constituency and Structure

The movement was created by a considerable number of peasant unions – associations and

cooperatives – in existence by 19878. From the outset, there was clarity in the movement that

it was created not to represent only the membership but to become the voice of millions of

Mozambican peasants. Structures such as community-based organizations, associations and

unions are taken as a strategy to strengthen the voice of peasants at local, provincial and

national levels. The acronym UNAC etymologically means “national union of associations

and cooperatives” (União Nacional de Associações e Cooperativas). During discussion

around the constitution of the Union, it was decided that the words “associations” and

“cooperatives” should be substituted by “Peasants” (Camponeses) because the Union aspired

to bring the voices of all peasants into the policy making processes.

The works of mobilization, formation and consultation, with a potential membership

of thirteen million peasants scattered throughout the countryside, remains an enormous

challenge to the union. The constituency of UNAC are families or individuals holding an

average of five hectares of land. Most of the peasants dedicate themselves to food production

for family consumption and market. In some cases they produce also cash crops such as

cotton, coconut, sesame and tobacco. The challenge for UNAC becomes even bigger if we

include the lack of proper road infrastructure, high levels of illiteracy, and diversity of 7 Donors are included here as decision makers in Mozambique because their budget support amounts to over

55% (figure in 2009) of the national budget, and they impose political and economic conditions in providing this

support. 8 There were 31 unions and 525 associations, with 34.455 members throughout the country (Statistics UNAC

1991).

cultures and languages. Local peasant organizations play an important role in ensuring inter-

mutual communications with higher structures of the UNAC and in promoting dialogue with

local authorities and other stakeholders.

In terms of structure, the union is organized into different levels. The smallest

organization is the association or cooperative9. These community-based organizations consist

of between ten to fifty members. There are different processes motivating the creation of

these organizations, of which three are notable. First of all, a Government Decree of 1979

urged all peasants to organize themselves into cooperatives, associations or collectives. Over

the years, these organisations proved problematic. As Castel-Branco (1995, 30) notes:

The cooperative movement lost its character as a process of transformation, and just became an

obligation, a task that had to be carried out. Local bodies (provincial, district and locality ones)

were only worried about the number of cooperatives set up, as statistical evidence of their

commitment to implementing the official political line. How these cooperatives were set up

(violently or voluntarily), why they were set up, how they functioned and what social and

economic impact they had on the life of the people - these were regarded as absolutely secondary

factors. Desire to prove loyalty to the political line, mixed with ignorance and political ambiguity,

soon turned the cooperative movement into a formality with a mere facade, which created

opposition more than it solved problems.

Many of these organizations had a natural death or collapsed because of the civil war. The

majority, however, survived and were the founding members of UNAC between 1987 and

1993.

The second driving force was programmes initiated by NGOs, donors and others.

When NGOs were allowed to operate in Mozambique in the early 1990s, one of the challenges

they faced was the fact that peasant families lived far from each other10. To facilitate their

work, as well as to reduce administrative costs, they adopted the strategy of creating groups or

associations through which they would deliver their services. At the same time, peasants and

other people living in the rural areas started to create associations as a way of attracting

financial or material support from NGOs (and donors). Most of these organizations would

disappear when the projects and programmes ended or when donors stopped delivering services

or giving support. Some of these organizations managed though to overcome dependency and

became autonomous by adopting a common vision and plan of action. Some of them joined

UNAC and continue to do so.

The third rationale behind local organisational formation was more voluntary-based.

Since 1979, many associations and cooperatives were created on a voluntary basis in situations

where peasant families encountered a common problem and, hence, joined hands to seek

common solutions. This practice can both be found in rural and urban areas (green zones).

These organizations, many of which also formed UNAC, are in a strong position to overcome

many difficulties because of the clarity of their vision and objectives.

9 In theory there is a distinction between an association and cooperative. Generally speaking an association does

not seek profit while a cooperative can seek profit. The term cooperative is disliked by many peasants due to the

way cooperatives were imposed during the previous revolutionary processes. Therefore, many cooperatives

changed their designations from cooperative to association, although in practice they are cooperatives. 10 Mozambique in 2005 had twenty four inhabitants per square kilometre.

In UNAC, associations are often organized into Zone Unions and/or District Unions.

A Zone Union consists of associations or cooperatives that, without covering a whole

District, are many in number within a certain geographic area and feel the need for

constituting a higher structure to represent their interests. Zone unions are exceptional and,

therefore, very specific according to the way the movement grew in that geographic area (in

the end, they operated as if they were a District Union). District Unions (known as UDACs –

Uniões Distritais de Camponeses) represent the movement at the level of a District and

interact with different stakeholders, especially with Local Government Authorities. They play

an important role in communicating with UNAC at central level. Provincial Unions are

structures that result from combining a number of District Unions and they represent UNAC

in the province. All activities planned at national level are implemented in articulation with

the provincial Union.

While self-organization of the peasantry can promote active participation in policy

dialogue and develop alternatives to current programmes, it is also important for improving

living conditions of the poor and vulnerable. In this regard, although Mozambique has known

considerable improvements in quality of life of the poor in the rural areas, especially after the

Peace Agreement in 1992, many peasants remain poor11. Strategically, many peasants

therefore organize themselves to reduce vulnerability against the many negative factors –

human or natural – that surround them. An ongoing study by Maren Bachke (2009, 29), in

trying to answer the question “Are farmers’ organizations a good tool to improve small-scale

farmers’ welfare” in Mozambique, has come up with an interesting conclusion:

From my research, we find that farmers’ organizations do contribute significantly towards

higher income, and thereby welfare among small-scale farmers. Thus, farmers’ organizations

are a good tool to enhance small-scale farmers’ welfare. Supporting farmers’ organizations is

therefore an efficient policy to reduce poverty among small-scale farmers, and these efforts

should be strengthened.

Although many NGOs and donors take associations and cooperatives as mere agglomerations

of poor peasants that facilitate relations between peasant communities and outsiders, or as

higher forms of production to produce for the market (many call them producer associations),

these organizations have been affirming themselves as spaces for debate and the design of

alternative policies and strategies for the development of their communities. They are

genuine spaces where people living far from decision-makers demand the right to participate

in defining and developing national policy. Every 17th of April (declared by Via Campesina

as the international day of peasant struggle), peasants organize rallies in different parts of

Mozambique, demanding the right to be heard. The affirmation of UNAC as a voice of the

peasantry in the country, at national and international levels, is a result of the strength of its

constituency in the rural areas.

11 The World Bank names “the poor” all those who live below the poverty line (less than US$1/day). This

however is a very conservative estimate of the poverty line, and it raises questions about the legitimacy of such

estimates.

UNAC Membership

Province General/Prov Provincial Zone/District Associ Individual Members

Union Commission Union Coop Male Female Total

Maputo-Cid 1 12 261

2,903 16,450 19,353

Maputo-

Prov 1 4 121

4,536 10,583 15,119

Gaza 1 2 45 1,808

Inhamban 1 3 182

3,130 4,507 7,637

Sofala 1 13 183

2,496 3,051 5,547

Manica 1 7 177

3,309 2,206 5,515

Tete 1 4 158

1,417 1,701 3,118

Zambézia 1 5 84 4,528

Nampula 1 16 176

1,024 945 1,969

Cabo Del. 1 10 199

1,965 1,472 3,437

Niassa 1 8 536

7,380 8,148 15,528

Total 7 4 84 2,122

28,160 49,063 83,559

UNAC Statistics 2008

The Table above demonstrates the situation of the membership structure of UNAC in 2008.

The total number of members who are linked to associations and cooperatives (less than

84,000) is far below the total number of peasants in the country (more than thirteen million),

which indicates the vast amount of mobilisation work still to be. Other peasant organizations

do exist in the country, but for various reasons they have not yet become members of the

Union. It is important however to recall that the movement does not represent only the

associations and cooperatives that have formal linkages with the Union; it rather seeks to

defend the rights of all peasants. It is also important to note that agriculture in Mozambique is

mainly practiced by women. This does not mean though that they control the decision-

making process in the peasant organizations or even the results of production in the

organizations and in the family. Gender equity and full participation of women in processes

of the movement remain a clear challenge.

Underlying Ideology

Mozambique is probably one of the few countries in Africa whose people who vigorously

sought to end capitalist exploitation and take over political power to pursue Socialism and

Marxism-Leninism. FRELIMO defined itself as a leftist political party12 and had the people

12 There are debates amongst scholars as to whether FRELIMO was in fact Marxist-Leninist or if it used the

designation instrumentally to gain support from the Soviet Bloc. While there are many competing opinions, this

seems to be beside the point. At its ideological core, FRELIMO was a radically modernist movement whose

leadership was made up of many urbanized, relatively well-educated elites with weak links to “traditional

structures”. They wanted to drastically transform the nation and Marxist-Leninism seemed, to the FRELIMO

(peasants and workers) effectively on its side, at least between 1975 and 1987. The party,

under the charismatic leadership of Samora Machel, effectively implemented a number of

economic, social and political measures that were in line with the theses of Marxism. For

instance, the formation of associations and cooperatives has been identified as the fundamental

institutional base for increasing the power of poor peasants to negotiate and intervene in policy

programmes, and for providing peasants with the opportunity to improve their living

conditions, expand their productive base (individually and collectively) and engage in

economic accumulation (Castel-Branco 2008)13. While only a minority among the population

may have understood the implications of the social revolution FRELIMO promised to

unleash after the expulsion of the Portuguese, the party’s programme was highly popular as a

way forward for overcoming poverty and it faced few internal challenges. No doubt, the

successful victory over the colonial fascist power gave FRELIMO the legitimacy for pursuing

this socialist-inclined trajectory.

The socialist ideology managed to reduce racism and tribalism, while simultaneously

promoting national unity, the distribution of resources and wealth (through for instance

nationalization of all property) and public services for all. This occurred as the country

sought to occupy a space as sovereign nation in the international community. There were,

however, a number of economic measures that were undertaken according to the philosophy

of the centralized economy that did not result in improving living conditions and the

economy. There are different explanations for this failure; as Castel-Branco (1995, 2) notes:

‘The easiest and most traditional explanations for the failure of economic strategies are the war,

natural disasters, deteriorating international terms of trade, and inadequate policies of the past’.

The war waged by RENAMO played a negative role in the country’s economy and

drove the country into chaos. In addition, FRELIMO’s struggle to implement its policy was

faced with critical shortages of human resources and infrastructure. By 1992, up to one

million people had died, both due to the conflict and associated diseases and starvation. Many

of the impressive gains of the revolution, such as widely available health care services and

education provision, had been knocked back to pre-independence levels. Rural areas had

suffered worst during the civil war, as infrastructure in these areas generally lay in ruins. The

FRELIMO leadership’s dream of presiding over a “modern”, industrialised and egalitarian

society also appeared, by the end of the war, to have been stillborn. Later, Mozambique’s

SAP resulted in the slashing of government subsidies and services for the poor, while

simultaneously devaluing the currency and making thousands of workers redundant (Sumich

2005). Levels of government corruption seemed to be increasing and state officials were now,

in contradiction to previous egalitarian norms, openly displaying their new wealth.

As stated earlier, UNAC was not created during the revolutionary period;

nevertheless, the motivations that underlie the foundation of the movement relate to the fact

that there was a revolutionary process underway, although halting and increasingly side-

tracked. In some way, the movement’s vision of an equitable society – and life in dignity for

all – can be framed and understood within the socialist ideology pursued by FRELIMO in the

years following independence. Admittedly, though, it is not possible to find references in

UNAC documents in which the movement affirms itself as a socialist movement (like, for

leadership at least, as the most viable and socially just way to do so without re-creating the kinds of oppressive

forms of exploitation that characterized colonial rule (Sumich 2005). 13 Of course, cooperatives and associations are not unique to Socialism-Marxism.

instance, the Landless Movement of Brazil does). The trauma caused by the failure of

Marxism-Leninism in Mozambique may partially explain this: although the majority of the

population may concur with most of the measures undertaken (in the name of socialism) after

independence (because they are enjoying the benefits today), most groups and people avoid

ideological terms such as ‘socialism’, ‘Marxist-Leninism’ and ‘revolution’.

If anything, UNAC’s vision, philosophy, strategies, tactics and types of alliances

indicate a movement that is following the paths of socialism although as an autonomous,

critical and independent movement.

Internationalism

Internationalism always accompanied the revolutionary history of Mozambique. Many

nations and institutions offered solidarity to the country in the most difficult moments of its

history, both during the struggle against Portuguese colonialism and during the early years on

independence in the face of the apartheid regime’s aggression. After the advent of neo-

liberalism, the nature of internationalism changed. Instead of championing bilateral

negotiations with unconditional aid, the World Bank set the rules for supporting the

Mozambican government and Western-based donors followed suit.

Although to some extent the Mozambican government abandoned genuine

international solidarity, the peasant movement continued to consider internationalism as an

important strategy in the fight against neo-liberalism. The years between 1987 and 1998 were

particularly difficult for the movement because contacts with peasant organizations in the

other countries were non-existent. Contacts were established with NGOs, academic

institutions and certain donors who, despite sharing the vision of the movement, were not

peasants. This period coincides with the downfall of socialist ideology, yet UNAC began

speaking about ‘the rights of peasants’, ‘no to privatizations’, ‘subsidies for agriculture’, ‘no

capitalism’ and ‘a luta continua’. For neo-liberal proponents in Mozambique, the movement

was seen as living in the past and without the capacity to bring about modern changes. It was

only the courage and determination of some men14 and women that ensured the maintenance

and consolidation of the movement. Credit should also be given to some organizations and

people that remained faithful and helped UNAC to walk this rocky road.

The year 1998 marks the beginning of steadier relationships with other peasant

movements. UNAC met the MST (Landless Movement of Brazil) and the first exchanges

took place the same year, when four peasants from UNAC spent two months in Brazil and

four Brazilians spent two months in Mozambique. The objective of the exchange was to

dialogue and determine the nature of solidarity henceforth, taking into account the similarities

and differences between the two countries. Following this, UNAC established a long-term

partnership with MST on the theme of “Training and Formation of the Peasantry”.

14 Ismael Ossemane, a former member of the Central Committee of FRELIMO, was in the forefront of the

process leading to the April 1987 Conference at which the first steps to launch UNAC were made. He

coordinated the commission that culminated in the constitution of UNAC in 1993. He was nominated in 1993 as

the coordinator of the UNAC. He carried out this task until 2006, when he decided to retire and act as an advisor

in building a younger and new leadership in the movement.

Underlying this partnership is a common understanding of the role of the peasantry in

struggles for a just society, although there might exist differences in strategies and tactics.

Peasant trajectories are conditioned by world, rather than simply national, history.

Global processes have impacted on the lives of peasants in Mozambique (and elsewhere) and,

resultantly, ‘an intensified dispossessions under a virulent neoliberal regime has become the

focal point of a contemporary peasant mobilization’ (Borras Jr. et al. 2008, 38). It was only

after meeting peasant movements from other nations that UNAC completed the story of

global restructuring. Neo-liberalism in Mozambique was not only banishing anything that

resembled socialism or communism from southern Africa (Depelchin and Nhampossa 2008)

but it involved an international agenda. In this way, the peasant struggle in Mozambique

became global; it went beyond the borders of the country, since even State sovereignty had

no power to stop globalization under neo-liberalism.

It was in these circumstances that UNAC joined Via Campesina (International

Peasant Movement) in 1999 and became the first organization to join the movement in

Africa. One of the Via Campesina slogans is ‘Globalize Struggle, Globalize Hope’. This

slogan summarizes the nature of the world movement, which is to fight against neo-liberal

institutions (WTO, World Bank, IMF, the G8, transnational corporations, etc.) and policies

(e.g. liberalization of markets, weakening of national sovereignty over the economy,

privatization of common goods and services) which have had ravaging consequences over the

global peasantry.

By becoming a member of Via Campesina, UNAC has had an opportunity to develop

new relations with other peasant organizations on four continents (Asia, America, Europe and

the rest of Africa). Relationships were also developed with like-minded research institutions,

academics, nongovernmental organizations and government bodies. Contact with the world

fuelled the peasant struggle in the country and introduced conceptual frameworks that justify

UNAC’s insistence on an independent, autonomous and critical peasant movement.

Although eighty percent of the population in Africa comprises peasants, Via

Campesina in 1999 was better organized in the Americas, Europe and Asia. Being the first

peasant organization to join Via Campesina in Africa, UNAC pledged to promote the global

movement on the continent. Already in 2004, at the 4th International Conference of Via

Campesina in Sao Paulo, four15 more organizations joined the movement. Five years later,

the 5th International Conference of Via Campesina took place (in 2008) in Maputo,

Mozambique, and nine African organizations became members; in addition, Africa was

divided into two Via Campesina regions (Africa 1 and Africa 2) (Final Report of Conference,

2009). However, UNAC has contacts with approximately forty African organizations of

peasants, pastoralists and fisher folks, with which the movement shares experiences relating

to current policies on agriculture and alternative practices on sustainable agriculture.

While, on the one hand, internationalism can refresh and give increased legitimacy to

local struggles in Mozambique, on the other hand it has the risk of sequestrating the

leadership from its constituency. Internationalism requires participation in relevant

international conferences, seminars, meetings and working groups which, while important,

happen on a regular basis. The challenge is to assure that participation in these international

actions arises from the local struggle and not at the expense of concerted national action.

15 These are CPM, Madasgascar; CNOP, Mali; LMP, South Africa; and CNCR, Senegal.

Internationalism has helped UNAC to enhance its influence on national policies. It

also aided the movement in recovering self-esteem amongst the peasantry, especially after

being subjugated by a new wave of capitalism disguised under globalization and by a scourge

of nationals who believe that any revolutionary intentions involving the emancipation of

peasants and workers were outdated. Internationalism therefore remains an important strategy

in the globalized world.

Relations with NGOs, Research Institutions and Donor Agencies

As mentioned, UNAC maintains relationships with nongovernmental organizations, research

institutions and donor agencies. In most cases, these relations are based on the need to

strengthen the peasantry and their organizations as a condition for reducing poverty.

Unconditional support (technical, material or financial) coming from these partners have

played an important role in this regard. Since its creation, UNAC has engaged and

collaborated with forty institutions and individuals. Most have assisted in building

organizational capacity, offering training programmes for the movement, and in policy

analysis and rural development projects. This support has been most successful when based

on principles of mutual understanding and respect for each other’s decision-making structures

and policies.

Although members of UNAC work the land and manage to generate some cash

income, most are not yet able to contribute in the form of fees to sustain the movement’s

activities at national level (including General Assemblies, the Secretariat, office expenses,

Policy Consultation seminars and workshops, and training). While there is a growing interest

by members to contribute to support the national structure16, dependency remains a great risk

to the movement. Some partner organizations have attempted to use this dependency to

impose an approach or ideology, but the movement’s clarity over its vision and objectives are

helping to resist and overcome these outside interventions.

Alternative research institutions are important in offering theoretical arguments for

advancing the struggle. Recently, though, there has been a proliferation of all kinds of studies

and evaluations in the country, commissioned by NGOs, donors, multilateral institutions and

Government bodies; this has created an expensive market for consultants, who are often

driven by financial reward. Fortunately, a few academic and research institutions exist which

are already producing critical and alternative thinking for the benefit of UNAC

Why Food Sovereignty?

When neo-liberal policies were initiated in Mozambique, they were backed by thick and

detailed documents which appeared to be the panacea to end absolute poverty in the country.

All those who sought to make a critical analysis of these policy papers and propose different

solutions felt helpless due to the fact that the former were taken as ‘unquestionable truths’ or

development ‘dogmas’ by their proponents. Soon after their implementation, though, it

became abundantly clear that they did not contain the truth in as far as development and

16 The General Assembly in 2007 approved an annual fee to be paid by each Province.

poverty reduction were concerned. The challenge facing the peasant movement was to

present sound alternatives to neo-liberalism, which would go beyond the unsuccessfully

implemented ‘colectivização do campo’ introduced by FRELIMO after independence.

Food sovereignty, a proposal set forth by Via Campesina in 1996 during the World

Food Summit in Rome, appeared to be closer to UNAC’s vision of a world of justice and

solidarity compared to the notion of food security. The latter’s definition might include the

concept of the right to adequate food, but this can be aptly understood as the softer side of

neo-liberal policies and hence not as an alternative to the capitalist global project focusing on

the control of – and access to – food systems. Hence, UNAC adopted food sovereignty as an

authentic alternative in the fight against poverty; this was likewise proposed and confirmed

by movements of peasants, indigenous people, migrants, women and rural communities

during the international forum held in Mali17 (Nyeleni Declaration 2007).

Food sovereignty is the people’s right to healthy and culturally-appropriate food

produced through ecologically-sound and sustainable methods, and entails their right to

define their own food and agricultural systems. It puts those who produce, distribute and

consume food at the heart of food systems and policies, rather than the demands of markets

and corporations; and it offers a strategy to resist and dismantle the current global corporate

trade and food regime, leading to food, farming, pastoral and fisheries systems determined by

local producers. Priority is given to local and national economies and markets, thereby

empowering peasant- and family farmer-driven agriculture, artisanal fishing and pastoralist-

led grazing. Transparent trade that guarantees a just income to all peoples and the rights of

consumers to control their food and nutrition is also promoted. Importantly, food sovereignty

ensures that the rights to use and manage lands, territories, waters, seeds, livestock and

biodiversity are in the hands of those who produce food. Overall, it implies the formation of

new social relations free of oppression and inequality between men and women, peoples,

racial groups, social classes and generations (Nyeleni Declaration 2007).

A number of projects have been formulated and implemented in the various

provinces, and these are aimed at increasing opportunities for ‘soberania alimentar’ (food

sovereignty) in targeted communities. The projects include one or more of the following

elements: general mobilization of farmers for improved ways of production, which involves

the formation of associations or cooperatives; implementation of specific projects to address

identified community needs (water supply, rehabilitation of infrastructures, seed banks,

commercialization, etc), the recovering of local seeds, equipment and livestock (goats,

cattle); and training of farmers on better crop and animal husbandry as well as on

conservation farming. UNAC has implemented initiatives aimed at promoting sustainable

agricultural production. These initiatives have at times involved collaboration with peasant

organizations from other countries (e.g. ANAP-Cuba and ATC-Kenya), including seminars

17 In February 2007 the International Forum for Food Sovereignty took place in Selingue in Mali. It was a

unique event that brought together many of the key movements and organizations worldwide, working on food

sovereignty. The Nyeleni Forum, as it is known, helped to shape a common international agenda and described

very clearly how movements want to realize food sovereignty in different countries. It also specified what social

forces need to be resisted because they devastate peasant-based food production and local markets, destroy food

sovereignty and make peoples dependent on transnational companies and international markets.

and workshops on conservation-based and organic farming, and exchange visits and other

training events targeted at leaders and other members at various levels.

At national level, UNAC has also taken an active part and formulated positions on

various themes affecting production and market access for rural farmers. Particular attention

has been given to increasing awareness amongst rural communities of the provision of the

Land Law and relevant Government agrarian-related programmes targeted at rural

communities. UNAC leaders have participated in several national and international seminars

at which various elements of the theme soberenia alimentar have been discussed. These

events have increased national and international awareness of constraints affecting

Mozambican farmers.

Achievements, Challenges, Setbacks

Since its creation UNAC has registered growth in its membership and, more importantly, has

played a crucial role in recovering the self-esteem, dignity and pride of the peasantry. This is

particularly important considering that many development thinkers and policy makers (in the

country) consider the peasantry (as a class) as doomed to vanish under conditions of

modernity. Significantly, in Mozambique, the peasantry is the only group that has managed to

survive the most difficult historical and social conditions, including colonization, slavery,

civil wars and now, the calamitous neo-liberal project. The foundation of UNAC is in fact a

confirmation that peasants can be the leaders of history and not the opposite.

For the peasantry, the passing of the Land Law in 1997 was, without a doubt, one of

the most important moments in the history of the country. Even under the intense pressure of

the multilateral institutions and donors, who were imposing the liberalization of all sectors of

the economy through constitutional and legal reform, the movement (together with different

stakeholders) managed to ensure that the new Land Law responded to the will of the

peasantry. Peasants remain the most important landholders in the country and will continue to

be so if the law remains unchanged. Access and control of land and other natural resources by

peasants under this Law are key conditions for fighting inequalities caused by primitive

accumulation, for promoting real poverty reduction, and for enhancing peace, stability and

public welfare.

UNAC is one of the most important and unequivocal custodians of the land

legislation. There are five important aspects in the law which UNAC centres its attention,

because they are crucial to ensuring that peasants retain control over the land. These aspects

are: a) Land remains State property; b) State and private bodies must consult communities

before requesting use rights for economic activities; c) Right of occupation, i.e., peasants are

not obliged to hold a written title to confirm rights over land; d) man and women have equal

rights in the occupation of land; and e) Communities can, if willing, demarcate the borders of

community land (this means that a particular community land ends where another community

starts18. There are strong voices from some sectors of society (the corporate sector, some

NGOs, academics and some government officials) that are keen on privatizing the land,

alleging that this measure would promote economic growth. UNAC’s stance in defending the

18 In essence it means that there is no available land in Mozambique. Communities can allow investors into their

land if they agree to after consultation.

land of the peasantry inhibits the transformation of land into a tradable good on the national

and even global market.

Two more laws were passed in recent years, on associations and cooperatives. This

was government’s response to the demand coming from peasants and their organizations for

an enabling legal framework to promote strong rural organizations that can impact on the

national economy in opposition to the proliferation of transnational corporations which target

local markets with cheap goods at the expense of local producers.

Under neo-liberalism, the proletarianization of the peasantry remains a risk. The lack

of adequate support for agriculture (especially for family peasant-based agriculture) and the

resurgence of agribusiness in the country (especially from rich nations to invest in agro-fuels,

reforestation19 and also in mining) may dispossess many peasants from their lands in the

search for precarious employment. However, the ambitions of UNAC as a movement go

beyond fighting for peasants to hold a piece of land to produce seasonal crops, access to

public services (education, health, etc.) is increasingly part of the UNAC agenda. The

movement also seeks to generate internal learning spaces in rural areas in promoting a

healthy and educated society. Already, it carries on training of leadership in different areas as

a first step in becoming UNAC’s “Peasants’ School”. In addition, starting from 2009, UNAC

is sending five young peasants for higher studies in agro-ecology at IALA (Instituto

Agroecologico Latino Americano – Via Campesina) in Venezuela.

Conclusion

The peasant movement history in Mozambique is not detached from the revolutionary

process that took place in reaction to colonial exploitation. It is a continuation and a logical

consequence of the people’s determination to struggle for justice, equality and solidarity in a

world infested by greed, violence and selfishness. Notions of social contract and

representative democracy have proven unable to thoroughly act in the interests of the

common people. It becomes, therefore, mandatory that peasants and all progressive groups

(focusing on women, youth, the homeless, etc.) organize themselves to fight continuously for

their rights and develop alternatives to hegemonic policies that go against the will of the

majority.

The neo-liberal agenda brought about through SAPs have succeeded in weakening the

economy of the peasantry in the rural areas and increasing the gap between the rich and the

poor; but it did not break the bonds of peasant solidarity, neither did it undermine the

peasant’s boldness to struggle for their rights and those of their families. The peasant

movement needs to engage in permanent struggle to challenge global capitalism and its local

variants across time and space. Building national and international alliances with like-minded

organizations, including the formation of the peasantry as a strong ideological and political

force, would help in identifying the nature and characteristics of the enemy and ways for its

annihilation.

19 This is undertaken by national and foreign investors, with fast growing lucrative alien trees under the

protection of carbon sequestration initiative. Mozambique forests have been devastated for many years and the

country needs reforestation, but with local varieties of trees.

Hopefully this chapter raises pertinent issues that need deeper studies and analyses of

the Mozambican peasantry. In the meantime, it is my wish that academics, activists and

friends of the movement have found in the chapter a sense of the current struggles of the

Mozambican peasantry and feel inspired to support their struggles through research and

activism and, in doing so, contribute to life in dignity for all.

Camponeses Unidos Sempre Veceremos20

Globalize Struggle, Globalize Hope

References

Backe, Maren. E. Are Farmers’ Organizations a Good Tool to Improve Small-scale Farmer’s

Wlefare? Paper presented and the II Conference of IESE: Dinâmicas da Pobreza e

Padrões de Acomulação em Moçambique, April, 2009 in Maputo, Mozambique

Baletti, B., Johnson T. M., Late Mobilizations: Transnational Peasant Networks and

Grassroots Organizing in Brazil and South Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change, Vol. 8

nos. 2 and 3, April and July 2008, 290-314

Borras Jr, Saturnino, M., Edelmen M., Kay., C. 2008. TransNational Agrarian Movement

Confronting Globalization. Willey-Blackwell, United Kingdom

Castel-Branco, Nuno. 1995. Mozambiques’s Economic Options, 1975-1995: Problems,

Lessons and Alternative Ideas. Maputo

Castel-Branco, Nuno. 1994. Problemas Estruturais de Desenvolvimento Agrário, Maputo.

Declaration of the Forum for Food Sovereignty, Nyeleni 2007. www.nyeleni.org

Depelchin, Jacques and Nhampossa, Dimantino., 2008. The Food Crisis is not Just About

Food. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference of La Via Campesina,

October 16 – 23 in Maputo, Mozambique

Estatutos da UNAC, 1994 com actualizações de 2006.

Hanlon, Joseph. 2007. Open University, Is Poverty Decreasing in Mozambique? Open

University, England, London.

Norfolk, Simon and Ribeiro, Vera. 2006. Assessment of Agricultural Information Needs in

ACP States for CTA Products and Services, Country Study Mozambique.

Plano Estrategico da UNAC 2003-2008.

Sumich, Jason. 2005. Elites and Modernity in Mozambique, PhD diss., London School of

Economics.

Toussaint, Eric. 2006. Your Money or Our Life: the Tyranny of Global Finance, Vikas

Adhyayan Kendra, Mumbai,

20 In English, this means ‘Peasants in Unity Shall Win’.