What BRICS Offered the Farmer: Reading beyond BRICS’ Gala Dinner Menu….by GPS Mann

At a time when wars, punitive tariffs and economic confrontation have divided the world, India brought major powers together in Delhi and helped secure agreement despite their competing interests. Hosting Putin, Xi Jinping and Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian carries considerable significance.

A common declaration gave substance to that gathering. India emerged taller, with greater authority to speak for countries that bear the burden of global crises but have too little say in global decisions.

Unfortunately, public discussion became strangely occupied with the cuisine and the vegetarian versus non-vegetarian controversy. This political quarrel over the menu overshadowed serious outcomes. The conditions under which millions grow food deserve greater attention than what the visiting leaders were served at dinner: Veg or Non-Veg!!

BRICS Gave It Attention to Agriculture. Media and We Did Not

Agriculture, WTO reform and farmers’ rights in seed systems found a place in the declaration, but received inadequate attention in our public debate and media. For farmers’ organisations, these commitments offer a concrete agenda to examine, pursue and hold governments accountable for. They deserve discussion beyond diplomatic circles.

The Right to Seeds and a Global Forum for Farmers

The declaration endorsed cooperation on agricultural inputs, genetic resources, information, digital agriculture and regenerative farming. Paragraph 61 specifically welcomed the launch of a Global Forum on Farmers’ Rights in Seed Systems, intended to address shared challenges, improve policies and encourage the exchange of traditional knowledge. Paragraph 63 sought progress towards a fair, balanced and development-oriented agricultural trading system at the WTO.

The seed initiative is particularly relevant and Indian Agricultural Ministry is planning to make a new law for regulation of seeds and the draft has been put in public domain for consultation.

Farmers have conserved varieties and accumulated valuable knowledge over generations. Their contribution deserves recognition. But farmers’ rights must also mean freedom to access better seeds and scientifically tested technology to compete with the farmers of developed countries whose crop yield is many times, use less pesticides, use less water.

A farmer needs genuine choice of seeds, reliable information and accountability for false claims. He should not be denied useful innovation and technology simply because somebody else has an ideological objection to it. Traditional knowledge and modern research can work together. Protection should empower the farmer to choose, including the choice to adopt something better.

Strengthening the WTO: Correcting an Unequal Contest

The WTO’s enforcement capacity has suffered badly under the new world order. Its appeals system became paralysed in 2019 during Trump’s first presidency following US obstruction of appointments, and the deadlock continued under subsequent administrations. BRICS’ call to restore effective dispute settlement addresses a serious weakness in international trade. Rules lose their value when powerful countries can frustrate their enforcement.

For Indian agriculture, this exposes a deeper contradiction. Our farmer is regularly portrayed as generously subsidised. Yet the OECD estimated India’s net producer support at minus 14.5 per cent of gross farm receipts during 2022–24. Budgetary assistance was outweighed by the price-depressing effects of trade policies and domestic marketing restrictions. This is negative subsidy: assistance comes in, but policy takes away more through reduced earning opportunities.

American farmers, meanwhile, receive positive net support. These sector-wide OECD estimates differ from WTO subsidy calculations; they do not establish that every American subsidy is unlawful. However, the imbalance is troubling. One agricultural sector receives net assistance while another carries a net policy burden. We then ask the Indian cultivator to compete and blame his inefficiency when he struggles.

A stronger WTO can help India challenge unlawful barriers against its exports and subsidy practices that violate agreed rules. Agricultural negotiations can pursue fairer support disciplines and food-security protections. Predictable access to overseas markets can also give our farmers better earning opportunities.

Developing countries also need effective remedies against injurious dumping and subsidised imports. Cheap imports alone do not establish dumping; these practices have distinct legal tests. WTO rules permit anti-dumping and countervailing duties after the required investigations. India must build the capacity to act competently and promptly. Farmers cannot wait indefinitely while their market collapses.

The India–US Trade Deal: Addressing Fears, Setting the Record Straight

The BRICS position can help address farmers’ legitimate anxieties by reinforcing India’s demand for fair competition. The government has told Parliament that key products, including rice, wheat, dairy and maize, are excluded from tariff concessions in the proposed interim agreement. These assurances must appear clearly in the final schedules, quotas and safeguards. BRICS provides political backing; lasting reassurance requires terms farmers can examine.

India’s diplomatic achievement is substantial. Its agricultural significance deserves equal seriousness. We must pursue fairer rules abroad while correcting policies that depress farmers’ earnings at home. Better seeds, dependable markets and freedom to benefit from rising demand belong together. Food security is a national responsibility; its cost cannot keep falling silently on the cultivator. That is the discussion Delhi deserves, long after its dinner menu has been forgotten.

September 14, 2026