US Facing Mexico’s Ban on GM-Corn Imports

Timothy A. Wise covers the trade-tension potential of the López Obrador government’s policy and its implications for a country where corn is such a major dietary staple.   

Shelling corn in Oaxaca, Mexico, 2007. (Lon&Queta, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

By Timothy A. Wise
in Cambridge, Massachusetts
Inter Press Service

Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador quietly rocked the agribusiness world with his New Year’s Eve decree to phase out use of the herbicide glyphosate and the cultivation of genetically modified corn.

His administration sent an even stronger aftershock two weeks later, clarifying that the government would also phase out GM corn imports in three years and the ban would include not just corn for human consumption but yellow corn destined primarily for livestock. Under NAFTA, the United States has seen a 400 percent increase in corn exports to Mexico, the vast majority genetically modified yellow dent corn.

The bold policy moves fulfill a campaign promise by Mexico’s populist president, whose agricultural policies have begun to favor Mexican producers, particularly small-scale farmers, and protect consumers alarmed by the rise of obesity and chronic diseases associated with high-fat, high-sugar processed foods.

In banning glyphosate, the decree cites the precautionary principle and the growing body of scientific research showing the dangers of the chemical, the active ingredient in Bayer/Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. The government had stopped imports of glyphosate since late 2019, citing the World Health Organization’s warning that the chemical is a “probable carcinogen.”

The prohibitions on genetically modified corn, which appear toward the end of the decree, have more profound implications. The immediate ban on permits for cultivation of GM corn formalizes current restrictions, ordered by Mexican courts in 2013 when a citizen lawsuit challenged government permitting of experimental GM corn planting by Monsanto and other multinational seed companies on the grounds of the contamination threat they posed to Mexico’s rich store of native corn varieties.

The import ban cites the same environmental threats but goes further, advancing the López Obrador administration’s goals of promoting greater food self-sufficiency in key crops. As the decree states:

“[W]ith the objective of achieving self-sufficiency and food sovereignty, our country must be oriented towards establishing sustainable and culturally adequate agricultural production, through the use of agroecological practices and inputs that are safe for human health, the country’s biocultural diversity and the environment, as well as congruent with the agricultural traditions of Mexico.”

Chronicle of a Decree Foretold

Andrés López Obrador (center) in San Baltazar Chichicapam, Oaxaca, March 2016. (Israel Rosas83, CC BY-SA 4.0. )

Such policies should come as no surprise. In his campaign, López Obrador committed to such measures. Unprecedented support from rural voters were critical to his landslide 2018 electoral victory, with his new Movement for National Renewal (Morena) claiming majorities in both houses of Congress.

Still, industry and U.S. government officials seemed shocked that their lobbying had failed to stop López Obrador from acting.

The pressure campaign was intense, as Carey Gillam explained in a Feb. 16 Guardian expose on efforts by Bayer/Monsanto, industry lobbyist CropLife, and U.S. government officials to deter the glyphosate ban.

According to email correspondence obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity through Freedom of Information Act requests, officials in the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture and office of the U.S. Trade Representative were in touch with Bayer representatives and warned Mexican officials that restrictions could be in violation of the revised North American Free Trade Agreement, now rebranded by the Trump Administration as the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA).

According to the emails, CropLife president Chris Novak last March sent a letter to Robert Lighthizer, USTR’s ambassador, arguing that Mexico’s actions would be “incompatible with Mexico’s obligations under USMCA.”

U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer, left, in 2017, having lunch with U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue in the dining room of USDA headquarters in Washington.  (USDA, Preston Keres)

In May, Lighthizer followed through, writing to Graciela Márquez Colín, Mexico’s minister of economy, warning that GMO crop and glyphosate matters threatened to undermine “the strength of our bilateral relationship.” An earlier communication argued that Mexico’s actions on glyphosate, which Mexico had ceased importing, were “without a clear scientific justification.”

Nothing could be further from the truth, according to Victor Suárez, Mexico’s undersecretary of agriculture for food and competitiveness. “There is rigorous scientific evidence of the toxicity of this herbicide,” he told me, citing the WHO findings and an extensive literature review carried out by Mexico’s biosafety commission Cibiogem.

And even though most imported U.S. corn is used for animal feed, not direct human consumption, a study carried out by María Elena Álvarez-Buylla, now head of CONACYT, the government’s leading scientific body, documented the presence of GM corn sequences in many of Mexico’s most common foods. Some 90 percent of tortillas and 82 percent of other common corn-based foods contained GM corn.

Mexico needs to be especially cautious, according to Suárez, because corn is so widely consumed, with Mexicans on average eating one pound of corn a day, one of the highest consumption levels in the world.

While the glyphosate restrictions are based on concerns about human health and the environment, the phaseout of GM corn is justified additionally on the basis of the threat of contamination of Mexico’s native corn varieties and the traditional intercropped milpa. The final article in the decree states the purpose is to contribute “to food security and sovereignty” and to offer “a special measure of protection to native corn.”

The ban on GM corn cultivation has been a longstanding demand ever since the previous administration of Enrique Peña Nieto granted permission to Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and a host of other multinational seed companies to begin experimental planting in northern Mexico.

Such permits were halted in 2013 by a Mexico court injunction based on a claim from 53 farmer, consumer and environmental organizations — the self-denominated Demanda Colectiva — that GM corn cultivation threatened to contaminate native varieties of corn through inadvertent cross-pollination.

In tractor caravan to Mexico City, a farmer’s protests sign says “Mexico Free of Transgenics,” undated. (Enrique Perez S./ANEC)

“It is difficult to imagine a worse place to grow GM corn than Mexico,” said Adelita San Vicente, the lead spokesperson for the plaintiffs who is now working in López Obrador’s environment ministry, when I interviewed her in 2014 for my book, Eating Tomorrow (which includes a chapter on the GM corn issue). Such contamination was well-documented and the courts issued the injunction citing the potential for permanent damage to the environment.

As Judge Walter Arrellano Hobelsberger wrote in a 2014 decision, “The use and enjoyment of biodiversity is the right of present and future generations.”

Mexico’s Self-Sufficiency Campaign

Blue agave fields in Tequila, in Mexico’s Jalisco State, 2017. (T2O media México, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

Mexico’s farmer and environmental organizations were quick to praise the decree, though many warned that it is only a first step and implementation will be key. “These are important steps in moving toward ecological production that preserves biodiversity and agrobiodiversity forged by small-scale farmers over millennia,” wrote Greenpeace Mexico and the coalition “Without Corn There is No Country.”

Malin Jonsson of Semillas de Vida (Seeds of Life), one of the plaintiffs in the court case, told me, “This is a first step toward eliminating glyphosate, withdrawing permits for GM maize cultivation and eliminating the consumption of GM maize. To end consumption we have to stop importing GM maize from the United States by increasing Mexico’s maize production.”

Mexico imports about 30 percent of its corn each year, overwhelmingly from the United States. Almost all of that is yellow corn for animal feed and industrial uses.

López Obrador’s commitment to reducing and, by 2024, eliminating such imports reflects his administration’s plan to ramp up Mexican production as part of the campaign to increase self-sufficiency in corn and other key food crops — wheat, rice, beans and dairy.

Mexican farmers have long complained that since NAFTA was enacted in 1994 ultra-cheap U.S. corn has driven down prices for Mexican farmers. The proposed import restrictions would help López Obrador’s “Mexico First” agricultural policies while bringing needed development to rural areas.

Will Biden Administration Block Action?

President Joe Biden talks with Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador on  Jan. 22, in the Oval Office. (White House, Adam Schultz)

Industry organizations on both sides of the border have complained bitterly about the proposed bans.

“The import of genetically modified grain from the U.S. is essential for many products in the agrifood chain,” said Laura Tamayo, spokeswoman for Mexico’s National Farm Council (CNA), who is also a regional corporate director for Bayer. Bayer’s agrochemical unit Monsanto makes weedkiller Roundup and the GMO corn designed to be used with the pesticide.

“This decree is completely divorced from reality,” said José Cacho, president of Mexico’s corn industry chamber CANAMI, the 25-company group that includes top corn millers like Gruma, cereal maker Kellogg, and commodity trader Cargill.

Juan Cortina, president of CNA, said his members might sue the government over the bans. “I think there will need to be legal challenges brought by all the people who use glyphosate and genetically-modified corn,” he told Reuters, adding that he also expects U.S. exporters to appeal to provisions of the USMCA trade pact to have the measures declared illegal.

Industry sources also warned that Mexico would never be able to meet its corn needs without U.S. exports and that U.S. farmers would be harmed by the presumed loss of the Mexican export market. Others quickly pointed out that Mexico was not banning U.S. exports, just GM corn exports.

U.S. farmers are perfectly capable of producing non-GM corn at comparable prices, according to seed industry sources, so the ruling could encourage the development of a premium market in the United States for non-GMO corn, something U.S. consumers have been demanding for years.

Such pressures may present an early test for President Joe Biden and his nominee for U.S. Trade Representative, Katherine Tai, whose confirmation hearing is scheduled for Feb. 25. Tai won high marks for helping get stricter labor and environmental provisions into the agreement that replaced NAFTA.

Will she and the Biden administration respect Mexico’s sovereign right to enact policies designed to protect the Mexican public and the environment while promoting Mexican rural development?

Victor Suárez certainly hopes so. “Our rationale is based on the precautionary principle in the face of environmental risks as well as the right of the Mexican government to take action in favor of the public good, in important areas such as public health and the environment,” he told me.

“We are a sovereign nation with a democratic government,” he continued, “which came to power with the support of the majority of citizens, one that places compliance with our constitution and respect for human rights above all private interests.”

Timothy A. Wise is a senior advisor with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and the author of Eating Tomorrow: Agribusiness, Family Farmers, and the Battle for the Future of Food.

This article is from Inter Press Service.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Donate securely with PayPal


Or securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button:




11 comments for “US Facing Mexico’s Ban on GM-Corn Imports

  1. A F
    February 27, 2021 at 06:00

    How dare Mexico think it has the sovereign right to make an independent decision in defiance of the US government agenda of world domination by it and the companies it represents.

  2. Mark Stanley
    February 27, 2021 at 00:24

    Dang it–Mexico is corn.There are so many village varieties that the maize breeders use them for strength genetics etc. The linear way that corn pollinates renders GMO pollen very dangerous–or at least the genetic variations are unknown.
    The U.S. has friendly neighbors—so now we’re going to go after one of them? Will Canada be next?

  3. Mary
    February 26, 2021 at 18:50

    Mexico will rule on this. Mexican lawyers in Mexico will advocate for bienestar in Mexico. I expect forensic lawyers and accountants in the US to advocate for clean corn as well.

  4. Jim other
    February 26, 2021 at 08:37

    Finally some scientific common sense from Mexico! Glyphosate is a dangerous carcinogen. And a danger to humans!

  5. Juliette Bouchery
    February 26, 2021 at 03:07

    That is such wonderful news ! One government in the world has enough courage to challenge the agribusiness lobby and GMs ! Here in the EU, it’s unthinkable. Let’s just hope Mexico manages to carry it through (and let’s hope the US doesn’t do its usual thing and crush resistance to its interests.

  6. February 25, 2021 at 20:13

    I am both surprised and glad to perceive that there might be at least one nation’s ruler who is not totally bought and/or fearful of the elite and powerful world puppeteers. His life is in danger if he does not capitulate. It will be interesting to see how the big shots respond. I hope this is met with many other nations following suit. My guess is that it will be met with strong resistance from the US and corporate leadership, and that he will cower in the end, but Latinos are known to be the most rejecting of dictatorships and vote in socialists and populists, so there is still some life left in South America, the people have placed somebody with some good character and balls to represent them. KUDOS.

  7. Guy
    February 25, 2021 at 19:12

    I wish we had such common sense from AgCanada. Obrador is keeping his promise to his citizenry ,good sustainable food production without any poisons to go with it .

  8. Rob Roy
    February 25, 2021 at 18:47

    Bravo, Mexico, for doing the right thing. GM products, Roundup, glysophates have no place in the world. Bayer/Monsanto should be banned everywhere.

  9. Kateinhi
    February 25, 2021 at 18:39

    Hooray for MX. doing the right thing!!
    We should be banning glyphosate also!

  10. Anonymot
    February 25, 2021 at 16:46

    For those who thought Mexico was only about drugs and gangs and illegal immigrants this should come as a shock. Biden is a centrist, but his financial support came from big industry like all of those in this article from Bayer to Kellogg to Cargill.

    For 20 years, small countries have felt the deprivations of sanction after sanction. We certainly can’t go to military solutions as we have done so unproductively from Libya to Afghanistan and Iraq, etc. all far from our boundaries. Perhaps if Biden were big enough to let this stand it might improve Mexico’s economy enough for them to want to stay home and to serve as a beacon for other nations we exploit with our many forms of poison. It might even tamp down the domestic poisons that flow into our stomachs.

    But note: the last vote intentions had 85% of the farm vote going to Trump, but little is written about what has happened to America’s industrial farming to the detriment of small farmers and the disaster we consume at mealtimes.

    • Guy
      February 25, 2021 at 19:16

      Good post and I understand that Bill Gates is purchasing a lot of farmland in the US.We have been poisoning ourselves slowly for many years but then again think about all the share value of the pharmaceuticals .

Comments are closed.