logo
Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture?

Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture?

First Post11 hours ago
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In India, most farms are manually operated or use outdated techniques passed down over generations, while US agriculture is highly mechanised and supported by advanced technology, including AI-based monitoring systems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
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump reveals his secret nickname for Melania, and even he says ‘It's terrible'
Trump reveals his secret nickname for Melania, and even he says ‘It's terrible'

Time of India

time32 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Trump reveals his secret nickname for Melania, and even he says ‘It's terrible'

Donald Trump gave a speech in Iowa during a 'Salute to America' event before July 4th. He was celebrating because Congress passed his 'Big, Beautiful Bill'. During the speech, he was talking about many topics, and then started speaking about military recruitment. Trump said, 'I remember saying to our great First Lady...', then stopped and joked, 'I call her 'First Lady,' isn't it terrible?', as per the reports. He admitted it sounds weird, but he calls her that because it reminds him he's the president. Trump added he says, 'Good night, First Lady, my darling,' when talking to Melania. He then complained that 'nobody wants to join our military force', as reported by Independent. ALSO READ: Ex-Trump aide Katie Miller joins Elon Musk's xAI after leaving White House by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Ingin Tahu Tentang Diagnosis Limfoma? Dapatkan Info Selengkapnya Limfoma Baca Undo Trump's parade and Melania's public appearances Trump recently held a big military parade on June 14, which was also his 79th birthday. But he never served in the army and in the past has made rude comments about U.S. troops. Melania has been seen rarely in public since Trump returned to the White House in January, as stated by the reports. But she did show up for the military parade and the Kennedy Center reopening. On July 4th, she visited Children's National Hospital in Washington. She told the kids: 'It's a very special day. We will have a big party at the White House… maybe next year you come and we'll celebrate together', according to the report by Independent. Live Events Melania and Trump's marriage rumors Melania bonded with the children over Taylor Swift and Sabrina Carpenter. Trump doesn't like Taylor Swift and said he 'hated' her last year because she didn't support him politically. Rumors about their marriage are always in the news. Author Michael Wolff said in May that they are basically 'separated'. ALSO READ: Trump may arm Israel with B-2 bombers, bunker busters if Iran restarts nuclear program He claimed they don't live like a normal married couple and seem to have separate lives. In the rest of Trump's Iowa speech, he said, he hates Democrats for blocking his bill. He mocked Iran and said farmers might be excused from raids on undocumented workers. Attacked NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. And used an antisemitic slur, which caused backlash, according to the report by Independent. FAQs Q1. What nickname does Donald Trump use for Melania? Trump jokingly calls Melania 'First Lady' as a pet name, saying it reminds him that he's president. Q2. Are Trump and Melania still living together? According to author Michael Wolff, they live separate lives and are basically 'separated,' though still married publicly.

'No surprise': Cuomo camp says Zohran Mamdani claiming himself Black in college application 'just the tip of iceberg'
'No surprise': Cuomo camp says Zohran Mamdani claiming himself Black in college application 'just the tip of iceberg'

Time of India

time35 minutes ago

  • Time of India

'No surprise': Cuomo camp says Zohran Mamdani claiming himself Black in college application 'just the tip of iceberg'

The camp of former Governor Andrew Cuomo doubled down on the NYT exposé that New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani declared himself 'Black' in a Columbia application form, despite having no African blood. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Mamdani was not accepted by Columbia but he marked both 'Black or African American" and "Asian" on his 2009 application. He said that he checked both the boxes to capture the fullness of his background, as Indian-Ugandan was not an option. 'This should come as no surprise as Mamdani, his proposals, his funding, and his background received absolutely no scrutiny from the press,' Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi said, adding that this could just be the tip of the iceberg. Mamdani said he does not consider himself as black or African-American but he is proud to be an Ugandan-American of Indian origin. Mamdani's father, Mahmood Mamdani, was born in India to Indian parents and migrated to Uganda, where he was raised. Mamdani's mother Mira Nair was also born in India to Indian parents. Zohran Mamdani was born and lived in Uganda until 7 years of age before they all migrated to New York. Mamdani told the NYT that he did not choose Black to get any advantage, but he felt that if he did not choose that option, he could not explain his racial makeup. An earlier video of Mamdani saying that he would never identify as an African-American like Elon Musk as that would be misleading, went viral. But Mamdani supporters said that he maintained his stance even while reacting to the NYT article. The revelation triggered a major debate over whether Mamdani indulged in fraud by checking a box knowing that he could not claim his race to be African. "Everyone also knows that the purpose of checking a race on a college application is to confer racial preference benefits to underrepresented groups. He is not black. He knows what the box is for and who is supposed to check it. He was trying to get a racial preference consideration despite not belonging to an underrepresented group," one wrote. Some social media users pointed out that while he checked the African-American box, he was neither an African, nor an American, as he became a US citizen in 2018.

Five Key Revelations from Army's Deputy Chief on Operation Sindoor
Five Key Revelations from Army's Deputy Chief on Operation Sindoor

The Wire

time35 minutes ago

  • The Wire

Five Key Revelations from Army's Deputy Chief on Operation Sindoor

New Delhi: The statements made by Lieutenant General Rahul R. Singh, deputy chief of army staff (capability development and sustenance), at the FICCI 'New Age Military Technologies' event on Friday (July 4) make it clear that Operation Sindoor was not just a bilateral India-Pakistan conflict, but a complex multi-actor engagement involving sophisticated intelligence sharing, real-time battlefield support and coordinated military assistance. Here are the five most significant revelations made by Lieutenant General Singh about Operation Sindoor: 'One border, three adversaries' Lieutenant General Singh revealed that during Operation Sindoor, India faced not just Pakistan, but effectively three adversaries on one border. 'Pakistan was the front face. We had China providing all possible support … Turkey also played a very important role in providing the type of support that was there,' he stated. This exposed the collusive nature of threat faced by India, where it faces multiple state actors working in concert, even if as a proxy conflict. This fundamentally changes India's strategic calculus and defence planning, as it confirms the two-front collusive threat is not a theoretical construct for the Indian military but an operational reality. Pakistan had full real-time intelligence visibility into India The most shocking revelation made by Lieutenant General Singh was that Pakistan had full visibility into Indian military deployments, which was made evident during the director general of military operations (DGMO)-level talks. 'When the DGMO-level talks were going on, Pakistan actually was mentioning that 'we know that your such and such important vector is primed and ready for action. I would request you to perhaps pull it back'. So he was getting live inputs … from China,' he disclosed. This represents a huge vulnerability and demonstrates China's direct involvement in providing strategic military intelligence against India, fundamentally altering the nature of the conflict. Indigenous equipment performance issues Lieutenant General Singh acknowledged that while some indigenous systems performed well during Operation Sindoor, others revealed critical gaps. He also highlighted supply chain vulnerabilities, noting that equipment scheduled for delivery by January or October-November was not available during the operation. Providing a specific example on the requirement of drones and his meeting with Indian drone manufacturers, he said he had asked these manufacturers in April how many of them would be able to 'provide the equipment that you're supposed to in the stipulated time'. 'A lot of hands went up. But when again I called them after one week, nothing came by. The reason is because our supply chains–we are still dependent on a lot of things from outside,' the officer continued. He added that 'had all [that] equipment been made available, the story may have been a little different, right'. This issue adversely affects India's defence preparedness and highlights the urgent need for robust indigenous defence manufacturing with reliable supply chains. Pakistan as China's 'live laboratory' for testing weapons The lieutenant general revealed that 81% of Pakistan's military hardware acquired in the last five years is from China. He described the situation as China using Pakistan as a 'live lab' to test its weapons against various other weapon systems. 'China perhaps has seen that he's able to test his weapons against, say, various other weapons systems that are there. It's like a live lab which is available to them,' he stated. This indicates that any conflict with Pakistan is also a test ground for Chinese military technology, which allows them to improve and upgrade their product for the next conflict. These upgrades will be available to Pakistan, which will be better prepared for the future. Turkey's direct military support to Pakistan with drones He also disclosed that Turkey provided substantial support to Pakistan, including Bayraktar drones and trained personnel. 'Turkey also played a very important role in providing the type of support that was there. Bayraktar, of course, he's been giving from before. We saw numerous other drones also coming in, landing in the face of war, during the war, along with trained sort of individuals who were there,' he revealed. This brings out Turkey's active role in supporting Pakistan against India, indicating a broader geopolitical alignment that extends beyond traditional Pakistan-China cooperation. Lieutenant General Singh's revelations are the first public official acknowledgement of China's real-time support to Pakistan and of Turkey's direct involvement in Operation Sindoor. He candidly revealed Pakistan's unprecedented visibility into Indian deployments and acknowledged critical shortcomings in indigenous equipment and supply chains. These revelations collectively underscore the immediate strategic challenges for India's defence posture. The multi-front threat reality and intelligence compromise are the most critical concerns requiring immediate attention and strategic response.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store