Agriculture is the US and India Central Speech

Why doesn’t India not even buy any American corn bush?

This is a matter criticize India’s trading policy, holding a finger on market restrictions.

In another interview lutnick Accused India of blocking American farmers And he urged him to open his agricultural market – offering quotas or restrictions as a possible approach.

Agriculture – Key Battle Field of US President Donald Trump Escalation of a trade warWith Tit-TAT-TAT or mutual tariffs that began on April 2.

Tariffs are taxes that are levied on goods imported from other countries. Trump has repeatedly branded India’s “King’s Tariff” and “Great Violence” of Trade Relations.

For many years, Washington has pushed to more access to the Indian agricultural sector, considering it as the main unused market. But India severely defended this, citing food security, livelihood and the interests of millions of small farmers.

Certainly, the transformation of India from the nation with a food deficit to a power plant is one of the biggest success stories.

In the 1950s and the 60s, the country relied on food assistance to feed its population, but a number of agricultural breakthroughs changed it. India became self -sufficient in the stands and became the largest milk producer. The rapid growth of gardening, birds and aquaculture has expanded its food basket.

Today, India is not just fed its 1.4 billion people, but as the eighth largest exporter in the world, as well as the delivery of grain, fruits and dairy products worldwide.

However, despite such great profits, Indian agriculture is still lagging behind performance, infrastructure and market access. World price volatility and climate change add to the problem. The crop gives a lag behind the global. Small land worse – Indian farmers work with more than a hectare, while their American colleagues had more than 46 hectares in 2020.

Not surprisingly, labor productivity remains low – almost half of India’s workforce operate in agriculture, but accounts for only 15% of GDP. By comparison, less than 2% of the US population depends on agriculture. With limited production work, more people are stuck in a low -paying farm, an unusual trend for the developing country.

This structural imbalance also defines India’s trade policy. Despite the excess farm, India supports high tariffs to protect its farmers from cheap imports. It supports moderate to high tariffs – from zero to 150% – for imports of farms.

The average weighted tariff – the average level of import duty – in India on American farm products is 37.7% compared to 5.3% on Indian goods in the US, reports Global Tank Global Trank Research Initiative (GTRI).

Bilateral farms between India and the United States are modest, in just $ 8 billion (6.2 billion pounds).

India mainly exports rice, shrimp, honey, vegetable extracts, castor oil and black pepper, while the United States sends almonds, walnuts, pistachios, apples and lentils.

But as the two countries are working on trading transactionExperts say that in Washington you want to push the export of the “Big Ticket” farms – wheat, cotton, corn and corn – to narrow down a $ 45 billion trading deficit.

“This time they do not want to export berries and things. The game is much greater,” says Biswit Dhar, a trading expert from the Delhi-Analytical Social Development Center.

Experts claim that it pushes India to reduce tariffs for the farmer, reduce prices support and open to genetically modified (GM) and dairy products ignore fundamental asymmetry in world agriculture.

For example, the US largely subsidizes its agriculture and protect farmers through the crop insurance.

“In some cases,” says Aji Srytovstova from GTRI, “subsidies in the US exceed 100% production costs, creating uneven game conditions that can devastate small farmers in India.”

Agriculture is the basis of India, which supports more than 700 million, almost half of the country’s population.

“The main thing to remember is that agriculture in both countries is quite different,” says the Zakhitt DAS, former head of the WTO Research Center at the Indian Foreign Trade Institute.

“The US has commercial agriculture, while India relies on an intense, subsistence farming. This is a matter of existence of millions of Indians compared to the interests of American agribusiness.”

But India’s agricultural problems are not just external. Mr. Dhar says most of the struggle of the sector is “engaged”. Agriculture has long been under -financially, receiving less than 6% of India’s total investment – funds designed for infrastructure, machines and other long -term assets that are crucial for growth.

To protect millions of livelihoods, the government protects key crops such as wheat, rice and dairy products and prices. “But even it is not confident,” he says.

Four years ago Tens of thousands of farmers protested Requiring the best prices and legal guarantees of minimal state support for the staples, mostly wheat and rice.

“Even the relatively perfect farmers who sell surplus do not see the turn in the near future. And if they feel like this, imagine the difficult situation of farmers,” says Mr. Dhar.

In addition to internal dissatisfaction, trade talks add another layer of difficulty.

Mr. das says that the real problem for India will be the way “have an agreement with the US, which takes into account export interest in US agriculture, balancing India’s interests in the agricultural sector.”

So what way forward?

“India should not give us pressure to open our agricultural sector,” says Mr. Srivstava. He warns that this can break millions of livelihoods, threaten food security and baking local markets with cheap imports.

“India should prefer its national interests and defend its rural economy. Trading cooperation should not come at the cost of our farmers, food sovereignty or autonomy.”

Ultimately, experts say India should modernize its agriculture, making agriculture more rewarded and became more competitive to increase exports. Unupom Kausik of Agri -business Olam suggests that with the highest world, India can create an excess of 200 million metric tons – enough to ensure global trade and hunger.

“In a sense, Trump keeps us a mirror. We did little to invest in the production capacity of agriculture,” says Mr. Dhar. “So far, the purchase time is the best strategy – perhaps offering American imports of industrial goods as a compromise.”

But for the best result, he said, India will have to “play a tough ball. In principle, tell us – we are open for negotiations on other fronts, but do not destabilize our agriculture.”

Obviously, the task of India is to negotiate from the position of force – offering enough to keep Washington at the table, keeping its rustic basis. After all, in the world trade, as in agriculture, terms and patience, they often give the best harvest. The jury comes out whether Trump is ready to wait.