In September of last year, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi supported the passage of three new laws with the intent to deregulate Indian agriculture by encouraging farmers to sell their produce directly to companies. Previously, the Indian government had long served as an intermediary between farmers and larger corporations, requiring minimum prices for agricultural products and protecting farmers from exploitation. The new laws strip farmers of these protections. Modi sees these new laws as a part of his plan to drastically change the farming industry in India through increased privatization, as a primary election commitment he made to his voters was to industrialize India, a promise he has yet to deliver on. This will lead the way for supply chains that will allow Indian agriculture to increasingly enter national and global markets. However, many farmers, who make up more than half of India’s population of 1.4 billion, see the Prime Minister’s new legislation as contrary to the agrarian traditions ingrained in Indian life and capable of damaging their agricultural system. The farmers fear that without government backing, their bargaining power vís-a-vís private corporations will put them at a severe disadvantage.
Over the course of the last few months, tensions around this agricultural reform have led to waves of mass protests across India. From New Delhi to the state of Punjab, farmers have come out in record numbers to voice their outrage over Modi’s reforms. According to the New York Times, at the height of the protests in November and December, over 250 million opponents of the new laws participated in the largest strike in history. For many days, protesters blocked off central highways, including those leading to the capital. These protests succeeded in uniting various political, economic, and social groups across India.
In an interview with National Public Radio published on December 4, social activist Medha Patkar, who participated in the protests, captured a prevalent sentiment: “This sector is not just neglected, but deliberately ignored and underestimated because of the present paradigm of development, which is not just market oriented but consumer-based. We want production by the masses—as Gandhi said—not mass production.” Protesters also point to the crucial role the agricultural system has played in feeding a country that as recently as the 1960s faced hunger and famine for hundreds of millions of its people. Damaging the industry through these laws risks future food insecurity.
In an effort to quell the widespread protests, farm union representatives and government officials came together and engaged in multiple rounds of negotiations with the goal of reaching a settlement to this national dispute with virtually no progress. Seeking to resolve this impasse, India’s Supreme Court ordered a temporary suspension of the controversial laws on January 12. This action is designed to help reengage the parties and to get them back to the bargaining table. In fact, as reported in Foreign Policy, the court stated, “The [government of] India has to take the responsibility. The laws have resulted in strike and now you have to solve the strike.” It is unclear whether the Supreme Court’s intervention will succeed. Farmer unions have been bolstered by these protests and have little appetite for concessions. Furthermore, the timing of the dispute could not have been worse for the Indian government, given that most of the season’s crops have already been planted, giving farmers more flexibility until March.
Much is on the line for India, its economy, and its political system. Like many countries, India is in the midst of a national recession, partly due to COVID-19. The country has suffered two straight quarters of negative growth. Modi’s own political prospects are likely to be strongly influenced by the outcome of this rift. The Prime Minister is under growing international pressure as the cause of the farmers garners attention and support outside of India, including from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other world leaders. India is at a critical juncture: the country must choose between a future of neoliberal policies and the expansion of a market-driven economy, or a continued commitment to a mixed economy reliant on both public and private sectors. It is too early to tell which of these two paths will prevail.