A few days ago (27 January 2021) a journalist from Argentina, Dario Mizrahi, who works for the Spanish newspaper Infobae, sent me some queries on farmers' protest in India. The ensuing piece (31 January 2021) cites Jonathan Kennedy (Queen Mary, London), Surabhi Mittal (Independent Consultant), Arvind Panagariya (Columbia), and me (Srijit Mishra, IGIDR). My response to Daario Mizrahi's queries in English are given below.
Q: The Indian government argues that agricultural reforms are necessary for greater economic progress for the country. To what extent is this truly the case? Why did these reforms spark so much anger among farmers?
A: There has been a crisis in India agriculture, which, analytically speaking, has two inter-twined dimensions - the agrarian and the agricultural. The agrarian crisis concerns the life and livelihood of nearly half of India's working population that is dependent on agriculture, which includes the multitude of smallholders with less than five acres of land holdings and the agricultural labourers, and that they have been adversely affected by the decreasing share of the pie. At the same time, the agricultural crisis is about the inappropriateness of the input-intensive agricultural production that is guided by a thinking of one-size fits all wherein costs and risks have been increasing and that these have been further aggravated by the changing climatic conditions.
These twin concerns require substantive reforms that address the livelihood sustenance of those dependent on agriculture, that are agro-ecological in nature, that are based on resilience inherent in local conditions, and that they reduce costs and risks. More importantly, these require the coming together of knowledge, policy and practice.
I am afraid that the three recent laws related to trade and commerce of farmers' produce, contract farming linking agricultural production to sale, and removal of limits on storage of farm produce for those who trade on these produce, respectively, do not address the agricultural crisis, and any claims to address the agrarian crisis is at best indirect and limited. Rather, a careful reading of the three laws indicate that these laws are meant to facilitate the trade and commerce of agricultural produce by large entities. This means that the multitude of smallholders will be pitted against few large entities who will buy their produce and thereby leading to their apprehension, and justifiably so, that their life and livelihood concerns are not only not being addressed but are likely to be worsened. In fact, the ongoing pandemic put that evidence starkly in front of them wherein the economy as a whole, including that of the smallholders and agricultural labourers, decreased, but at the same time there are a few large entities, particularly the billionaire club, whose income increased.
Q: What could be the political consequences of these protests if they continue, and how might they affect the government of Narendra Modi?
A: I must admit that I am not a political commentator and my knowledge of this evolving scenario has been constrained by the lockdown on account of the pandemic. Nevertheless, as I understand, the farmers' protest seems to be spreading in its intensity. While the protest has largely remained peaceful and non-violent, it is unfortunate and shameful that there have been some untoward incidents in New Delhi on India's Republic Day on 26 January 2021.
Sans these incidents, credit needs to be given to the administration and to the protestors for keeping the movement within the realms of democracy, as BR Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of India's constituent assembly, had forewarned us. However, having said that, one is reminded of Mahatma Gandhi's calling off of the Non Cooperation Movement in 1922, after more than a year of the movement, because of retaliatory violence leading to the burning down of a police station. In the same vein, irrespective of who has been responsible for the untoward incidents in New Delhi on India's Republic Day in 2021, the protest can gain in strength by avoiding chaos and anarchy only if it follows the paths suggested by Ambedkar and Gandhi.
As an observer, my view is that this movement has been growing in strength because of its apolitical nature in the sense that it has tried to keep the political parties at a distance. The minimum reading that I see from the movement is a request to the Narendra Modi government to address their genuine concerns. At this juncture, a possible scenario is that both sides may come to an agreement or even agree to disagree and I do not visualize any political implications. However, if this continues for a longer time then your guess is as good as mine.
[The above responses were sent on 28 January 2021]
