From The Hindu, July 4, 1925: The situation in China
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
21 minutes ago
- First Post
Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture?
As India and the US push to finalise a trade pact before Trump's July 9 deadline, agriculture has emerged as the biggest roadblock. With disagreements over GM crops, dairy and ethanol, and concerns over rural livelihoods, both sides are locked in a tense standoff. Can they reach a deal without upsetting India's farmers? read more A farm worker holds rice sapling as he prepares to plant them in a field on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, India, July 22, 2024. File Image/Reuters India and the United States are racing to conclude an interim trade pact ahead of President Donald Trump's July 9 deadline but a long-standing hurdle threatens to block progress — agriculture. Despite nearing consensus on various industrial sectors, disputes around farm goods, including genetically modified crops, dairy imports and ethanol remain reportedly unresolved. The issue is not merely economic for India; it touches upon food security, rural livelihoods, and political sensitivities, all of which have major implications for the country's domestic stability. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India's agriculture sector is non-negotiable Though farming and allied activities contribute a relatively modest portion — around 16 per cent — to India's GDP, the sector supports nearly half of the country's population of 1.4 billion. The farming community represents a dominant political constituency and has historically influenced policy decisions through sustained mobilisations. In 2021, the Indian government was compelled to withdraw major agricultural reforms following year-long nationwide protests. This past resistance still casts a shadow over current trade negotiations, as New Delhi remains wary of sparking fresh unrest by opening up its agricultural sector to foreign competition. India's farming structure is notably small-scale. The average size of a farm is just over a hectare, contrasting sharply with American agricultural operations, where the mean farm size exceeds 180 hectares. In India, most farms are manually operated or use outdated techniques passed down over generations, while US agriculture is highly mechanised and supported by advanced technology, including AI-based monitoring systems and large-scale machinery. US agricultural demands vs India's red lines A central point of contention is Washington's push for increased access to the Indian market for a range of American agricultural products. The US seeks to expand exports of various farm commodities — among them genetically modified (GM) corn and soybeans, wheat, poultry, dairy, rice, ethanol, and a variety of processed foods including canned peaches, frozen French fries, chocolates, cookies and citrus fruits. While India has indicated some openness to easing tariffs on selected imports such as dry fruits and apples, it has remained firm on rejecting access to GM grains, US dairy products, and ethanol. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Genetically modified crops form a significant part of US agricultural output. However, India does not currently allow the commercial cultivation of GM food crops due to concerns over ecological balance, food safety and the impact on smallholder farmers. Even as India imports edible oils made from genetically modified crops — such as soy and canola — it restricts GM crop cultivation. The commercial release of GM mustard, for example, remains on hold due to pending legal proceedings, and a previous attempt to introduce GM brinjal was blocked in 2010. Nonetheless, some flexibility is being explored. According to Bloomberg, Indian regulators may consider permitting select GM-derived by-products used in animal feed, such as soybean meal or distillers dried grains from corn-based ethanol production. These items would not directly affect human food chains but would still mark a departure from India's long-standing GM restrictions. Why dairy and ethanol are particularly sensitive India's dairy sector employs more than 80 million individuals, a figure that includes small-scale farmers, cooperatives, and vendors. The industry is largely unorganised and depends on herds that typically contain two to three animals per household. In contrast, US dairy farms operate on a vastly different scale, often managing hundreds of cattle with heavy reliance on mechanisation and feed practices that include animal by-products. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This latter point is a major concern in India, where dietary norms and religious sensitivities significantly influence food preferences. The potential entry of dairy sourced from cows fed with animal remnants has been met with strong resistance from Indian consumers and cooperatives like Amul, which have played a key role in shaping the country's self-reliant dairy ecosystem. Similarly, ethanol is another highly sensitive area. India has made substantial progress under its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) initiative, aiming to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels by blending petrol with domestically produced ethanol. Most of the ethanol used in India is derived from surplus sugarcane, rice and corn. Allowing the import of US ethanol would not only compromise this strategic energy programme but could also undermine the investments made by Indian distillers and agribusinesses. What each side is willing to concede With the deadline for reciprocal tariffs fast approaching, negotiators from both countries are working to close the deal. Sources indicated that the Indian delegation, led by Special Secretary Rajesh Agarwal, has had to extend its stay in Washington due to ongoing disagreements, particularly over agricultural tariffs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India has shown willingness to discuss reductions on industrial tariffs and provide access to the US in sectors where the political cost is lower — such as in automobiles, a long-standing American request. It has also pushed for broader access to US markets for Indian exports from labour-intensive sectors including textiles, leather, jewellery, plastics, and chemicals. The interim agreement is seen as a stepping-stone towards increasing bilateral trade volumes, with a shared ambition to double total trade to USD 500 billion by 2030 — a goal reiterated by Trump during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's February visit to the United States. Trump, speaking about the potential deal earlier this week, said: 'I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I think India is going to do that, and if they do that, we are going to have a deal for much less tariffs.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India is not backing down India's resistance to opening its agricultural market is deeply rooted in structural and strategic realities. The rural economy is vulnerable to global market shocks. Even modest tariff relaxations could disrupt domestic pricing and erode the safety net provided by public procurement and the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system — pillars that protect farmers from price crashes. Many experts argue that liberalising agricultural trade too quickly could expose India's fragmented farming community to the volatility of global commodity markets dominated by large multinational agribusinesses. These companies often benefit from generous subsidies and economies of scale unavailable to Indian farmers. Further complicating the negotiations is the demand from US exporters for greater parity. However, India's current agricultural tariff regime — ranging from zero to 150 per cent — is not exceptional. The US, too, maintains steep tariffs on specific imports, such as tobacco at over 350 per cent. Thus, criticisms of asymmetry in trade practices may not be entirely justified. India's position finds some backing under WTO norms, which allow member nations to protect sensitive sectors for reasons such as food security, rural development, and employment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Nonetheless, the final decision may come down to political calculus more than legal boundaries. Farmers and labour unions mount pressure Opposition to agricultural liberalisation is growing beyond policy circles. On July 3, leaders of the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) held a press conference in Hyderabad, reaffirming their call for an all-India strike on July 9. The SKM, in collaboration with trade unions, is staging protests to oppose what it describes as 'anti-farmer, anti-labour, and anti-people' policies. Former Member of Parliament Vadde Sobhanadreeswara Rao voiced strong opposition to including agriculture in any trade agreement with the U.S. He and other SKM leaders also criticised the government's delay in enacting legislation to guarantee MSP as a legal right. The farmers' coalition has called for a full withdrawal of the National Policy Framework for Agricultural Marketing (NPFAM) and warned of further mobilisations if agriculture is compromised in trade talks. A way out? In light of these challenges, a compromise may be possible through selective market access rather than full liberalisation. One such mechanism could involve tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) — a system that allows a limited volume of imports at reduced tariffs, while maintaining higher duties on imports exceeding the quota. This model was recently adopted in the US-UK mini trade pact announced in May, where agriculture was kept out of contentious discussions. India may be open to marginally lowering tariffs on select low-risk items such as almonds, walnuts, apples, raisins, olive oil, spirits and wine — products that pose minimal threat to domestic producers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Such a calibrated approach could allow both sides to claim victory without triggering adverse political fallout in India. However, the extent of these concessions remains uncertain. A NITI Aayog policy paper has suggested tariff cuts on certain US agricultural products, but it is unclear whether this reflects the official stance of the Indian government or is merely a preliminary recommendation. Agriculture remains the thorniest issue in the India-US trade negotiations. With inputs from agencies
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
China to impose anti-dumping tariffs on EU brandy
China to impose anti-dumping tariffs on EU brandy(AP PHOTO) China said it will impose "anti-dumping" taxes of up to 34.9 percent on brandy imported from the European Union starting from Saturday, adding to tensions between the major trading partners. Beijing launched an investigation last year into EU brandy, months after the bloc undertook a probe into Chinese electric vehicle (EV) subsidies. It later said it had determined in a preliminary ruling that dumping had occurred and imposed "temporary anti-dumping measures" on imports of the alcoholic beverage. And Beijing's commerce ministry said on Friday that China's tariff commission had "decided to impose anti-dumping duties on imports of relevant brandy originating in the EU from July 5, 2025". "The investigating authority finally ruled that there was dumping of relevant brandy imported from the EU," the ministry said in a statement. "The domestic relevant brandy industry was threatened with substantial damages, and there was a causal relationship between the dumping and that threat," it said. The levies will apply to brandy in containers of less than 200 litres, according to the ministry. It said the tax rate on French liquor giant Jas Hennessy would be 34.9 percent. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Remy Martin will be hit with 34.3 percent and Martell 27.7 percent. The levies come as Chinese top diplomat Wang Yi has held fraught meetings with his counterparts during a tour of Europe this week. And they will likely be high on the agenda when he meets French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot on Friday afternoon in Paris. - Bitter taste - A trade spat between Beijing and the bloc erupted last summer when the EU moved towards imposing hefty tariffs on EVs imported from China, arguing that Beijing's subsidies were unfairly undercutting European competitors. Beijing denied that claim and announced what were widely seen as retaliatory probes into imported European pork, brandy and dairy products. The EU imposed extra import taxes of up to 35 percent on Chinese EV imports last October. Beijing later lodged a complaint with the World Trade Organization, which said in April that it would set up an expert panel to assess the EU's decision. China is a major market for French cognac, with exports worth 1.4 billion euros ($1.6 billion) per year. The anti-dumping measures are costing the industry 50 million euros per month. China and the EU are scheduled to hold a summit this month to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties. But the festivities come at a time of strained relations, with the trade tensions compounded by Beijing's position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which Brussels says shows tacit support for Moscow.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
‘Heads of State' movie review: Priyanka Chopra Jonas, Idris Elba, and John Cena go all out to save the world (and partly succeed)
In Heads of State, Priyanka Chopra, Idris Elba, and John Cena do everything but provide an escape from the current geopolitical headwinds. So, if you are looking for respite, look elsewhere. In fact, they put you square in the middle of a fragile international order being puppeteered by an American President Will Derringer (John Cena), with a penchant for acting in films, and a British Prime Minister Sam Clarke (Idris Elba), who runs at midnight in the streets of London donning Arsenal merchandise. The film opens with Noel Basset (Priyanka Chopra Jonas), a tough MI6 agent, leading a covert operation in the middle of Spain's Tomatina festival. However, things quickly go sideways when her team is sabotaged, and we are led to believe that she has died. On the other hand, in the land of the free, President Derringer and Prime Minister Clarke's hostility only grows. After fumbling a press conference, a staff member suggests that they travel on the same flight and make amends during the journey. And obviously, a Russian is going to swoop in to upend their plans — Air Force One is attacked by Viktor Gradov (Paddy Considine), a Russian-born arms dealer turned extremist, and the two gentlemen quickly find themselves stranded in a Belarusian forest. The duo must devise a plan to get out of the woods and reach the NATO conference in Italy in time for an important vote, all while being chased by Gradov's ruthless killers. Heads of State (English) Director: Ilya Naishuller Cast: Idris Elba, John Cena, Priyanka Chopra, Paddy Considine, Sarah Niles, Jack Quaid Runtime: 116 minutes Storyline: When Air Force One gets shot down over enemy territory, the President of the USA and the Prime Minister of the UK find themselves on the run and working together to thwart a global conspiracy. Watching Cena and Elba crawl their way back to civilisation with their larger-than-life personalities in full display makes for an entertaining watch. The sequence featuring the President and the Prime Minister crouched in a truck transporting livestock, with Hang Me, Oh Hang Me playing in the background, is one for the ages. The leads' slick action sequences cushioned by the acting chops of the supporting cast ground this movie. Basset's partly funny puns and surprising comeback midway through the film, Derringer's heart-breaking honesty, and Clarke's hard shell that eventually cracks help steer the movie to its shore. A special mention to the restrained Sarah Niles, as the top aide to the President, and Jack Quaid, the CIA safe house watchman, who brings brevity to the frame. However, by robbing the audience of a chance to experience this high-octane thriller in theatres, Amazon Studios is doing a big disservice to the craft of action movies. There is more than enough fun and frivolity in this summer movie, but its nonchalance (or wilful ignorance?) concerning the current global order left me feeling uncomfortable; it somehow manages to walk a tight rope of self-aware satire and fantastical politicking. Championing NATO as 'friends who stand up to a bully' is disingenuous and makes one sad at the thought of another movie from the West working as a propaganda vehicle. Ilya Naishuller's 120-minute-long film, in the end, feels like an attempt to whitewash the international groups and organisations that have caused instability across the developing world. Heads of State is currently streaming on Prime Video
