When I look at India’s current trade landscape, I am reminded of the careful balance we have always tried to maintain between economic growth and the preservation of our agricultural foundation. As of today, India has Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with 14 countries. The most recent FTA we signed was with the United Kingdom.
Whenever we negotiate such agreements, there are numerous factors we consider. Trade is not merely about exchanging goods; it is about safeguarding national interests while creating opportunities for growth. Since the early years after independence—1947 to 1950—India has been guided by a principle: we will engage in diverse forms of trade, including both imports and exports, but we will never compromise our agricultural stability.
From the very beginning, we resolved that we would not import agricultural products in a way that harms our farmers or creates an imbalance in our agricultural sector. This was not just a policy—it was an ethos that aligned with our cultural values. In ancient times, when sages and saints visited kings, their blessings were not for more land or larger armies, but for fertile fields, timely rains, and abundant harvests. Agriculture was always seen as the heart of prosperity.
I speak not only as a policymaker but also as someone deeply connected to farming. Though much of my life has been spent in cities, my family’s roots have been in agriculture for generations. We owned large holdings once, but due to government regulations and evolving policies, we gave up a significant portion of our land so that it could be cultivated by other farmers. Today, my landholding is smaller, but I still consider myself a farmer—and perhaps even the smallest farmer in the room during policy meetings.
This personal background shapes my views on trade agreements and agricultural policy. I understand the struggles of farming—the uncertainties of weather, the challenges of production, and the difficulties in storing and selling produce.
Over the years, we have engaged in various forms of international trade—bilateral agreements, multilateral arrangements, and comprehensive economic partnerships. For more than four decades, I have been involved in policy discussions through the Research and Information System (RIS), an institution dedicated to studying India’s trade relationships and advising the government.
One core principle remains unchanged: when we negotiate trade deals, agricultural products are excluded. This stance has occasionally led to friction, most notably with the United States. Their primary concern is that India refuses to open its agricultural market to American products. They would like their genetically modified crops and subsidized produce to enter our market, benefiting their farmers but harming ours.
We have stood firm. We have told them clearly: we are willing to discuss trade in other sectors, but agricultural products will remain off the table. Even under pressure—whether in the form of threats to impose 200% tariffs or other economic measures—we have maintained this position. We have also refused to accept genetically modified (GM) crops into our markets, safeguarding both our farmers’ livelihoods and our consumers’ health.
In agricultural policy, three aspects are critical: growing, storing, and selling. While these may sound simple, they are complex and interconnected.
= Growing requires knowledge, resilience, and adaptation to environmental challenges. Farmers must contend not only with economic pressures but also with nature’s unpredictability—droughts, floods, untimely rains.
= Storing is equally important, as inadequate storage leads to post-harvest losses. Without proper facilities, farmers are often forced to sell at low prices.
= Selling involves ensuring fair market access, preventing exploitation, and creating efficient supply chains.
Today, there is much discussion around organic farming. Historically, Indian agriculture was entirely organic. However, over time, the overuse of chemical fertilizers degraded our soils and reduced the nutrient value of our produce. Returning to organic methods is essential—not just for health and environmental reasons, but because nutrient-rich crops contribute to intellectual and societal growth.
That said, it is unrealistic to believe that India can be fully self-sufficient through organic farming alone in the short term. We need a balanced approach: gradually restoring soil health while ensuring sufficient production to feed our population of 1.4 billion and even export surplus produce.
Despite our limitations, we already feed our massive population and export agricultural goods. Interestingly, countries like China, the United States, and European nations—despite their GM crop cultivation—remain some of the largest importers of agricultural products. This shows that GM crops are not a silver bullet for food security.
Agriculture is at the center of a global struggle—a silent battle over control of food systems. Many powerful nations and corporations want to dominate agricultural trade. India is perhaps the only country with both the capacity and the will to resist this pressure and offer the world a sustainable model.
To do so, we must strengthen our domestic policies, particularly in water management and land use.
One of the biggest challenges in agriculture is uneven water distribution. Some regions have surplus water, while others face chronic shortages. In policy discussions, I have advocated for an interlinking of water basins—not rivers. Rivers cannot truly be linked, but water sources can be interconnected through infrastructure projects.
During the tenure of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, I served on a committee exploring this idea. Unfortunately, political changes in 2004 halted the work. However, the vision remains: to ensure that no agricultural land is left barren for lack of water.
This approach could also slow down the unplanned urbanization we have seen in recent decades. Too often, land without irrigation is declared “non-agricultural” and converted for urban use. Cities expand, consuming water meant for agriculture, and wastage increases. If instead we provided irrigation to such lands, we could preserve agricultural zones and improve rural livelihoods.
The Ken-Betwa project in Madhya Pradesh is an example of this concept in action—transferring water from surplus areas to those in need.
For India to remain Sujalam Sufalam—rich in water and crops—we must address three priorities at the policy level:
1. Enhance production (growing) through sustainable practices, balancing modern technology with traditional wisdom.
2. Improve storage infrastructure so that farmers are not forced into distress sales.
3. Ensure equitable water distribution by interlinking water basins, thereby maximizing the amount of cultivable land.
This requires cooperation between farmers, the government, and traders. Farmers handle growing, the government supports storage and infrastructure, and traders ensure fair market access. Only through such coordination can we secure India’s agricultural future.
By Dr. Seshadri Chari
PROFESSOR EMERITUS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE & sTRATEGIC
STUDIES, sAVITRIBAI PHUlE uNIVERSITY, PUNE
( The article is based on the speech delivered by the writer at Virgin Land Security Summit 2025, held in New Delhi.)
Leave Your Comment