‘Sustainable agriculture’ has been quoted in the National Security Strategy of the President Obama as one of the important areas of cooperation between India and USA.  To this effect, in the recently concluded Indo-US Strategic Dialogue, both sides signed a Memorandum of Understanding for cooperation and shared research on agriculture and food related issues. The joint declaration also accepted India’s leadership role in global agriculture and food security.

The Indo-US relations in the area of agriculture are progressing on two fronts. The first is at the bilateral level where it is being shaped by the United States – India Knowledge Initiative on Agricultural Education, Research, Service and Commercial Linkages (USIKIA). The second is at a multilateral level, under the auspices of WTO and the Doha Development Round, where negotiations are progressing for determining the future structure of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). 

The USIKIA requires the two nations to identify partnership areas in teaching, research, service and commercial exploitation of the knowledge generated through collaborative research. The formalizing of the agreement in 2006 has led to cooperation on teaching, research, and use of information and communication technologies to disseminate knowledge. The agreement calls for commercialization of relevant technologies and bringing the agricultural production in India in compliance with international SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards).

On the other hand, the two sides are at loggerheads in the Doha Development Round. The difference in opinion is due to the interest of the agricultural lobbies in both the countries. India and USA want access to each others markets while trying to protect their domestic markets from foreign competition. Thus a paradoxical situation has been created, characterized by cooperation as well as opposition.

The first issue between US and India is of the reciprocal access to markets. India wants USA to reduce the huge domestic support that USA and other developed countries provide to their farmers. This effectively shields producers in these countries from foreign competition and brings down the global food prices, thus eliminating competition at a global scale. With USA and other developed countries, it is the question of high tariff ceilings that India imposes on agricultural imports. India contends that high tariff ceilings are necessary to protect the small and subsistence farmers. However, negotiations are undergoing for reduction of high tariff ceilings and domestic support.

The second area of contention between India and USA, in the WTO, is the issue of ‘Special Products’ and ‘Special Safeguard Mechanism’. 'Special Products' are products that are cultivated by small and marginal farmers. Any lowering of the price of these products through imports, would affect the market price of these products thus affecting the livelihood of farmers in the country. India along with other developing countries, wants freedom of designating agricultural produce as special products, based on independent criteria to be determined by the countries themselves. The developed countries, on the other hand, want to limit the special products to a small pool of products, based on criteria previously agreed upon.

The other issue is of Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM). It is a device in which higher tariffs are triggered when the import of a certain product breaches a pre-determined level; that is there is an import surge. The Special Safeguard Mechanism has been there in the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, but it was limited to use only by certain developed countries, owing to the rationale that they would be more likely to face import surges. India along with other developing countries wants SSM to be extended to all countries, while the developed countries are opposing it on the ground that the provision is likely to be misused. 

The last issue that informs the dynamics of the Indo-US agricultural cooperation is the issue of trade in 'Genetically Engineered (GE)' crops with the associated Intellectual property (IP) rights in seeds and technology. This issue has been in the limelight recently owing to the controversy over the introduction of Bt-Brinjal.  In the case of GE crops IP rights in seeds are likely to be controlled by the private companies and when examined in the context of GE crops encouraging monoculture, it may lead to monopolization of agriculture by a single or consortium of American companies. This aspect, coupled with the increasingly aggressive interests of large American multinationals in trade in GE crops pits the commercial interests of the American multinationals against the food security interests of India.

Though, there is hardly a doubt that agriculture is a highly contested issue, the recent engagement between the two nations on the issue is important. First, it shows that the relationship between the countries is not only restricted to the realms of high politics such as nuclear and military issues. It has gradually moved to areas of non-traditional security, making the relationship more organic in nature. Second, it also underlines the fact that the two countries have understood the fact that a constructive dialogue on issues such as agriculture can fructify only in bilateral settings. In multilateral settings both countries have to negotiate within the framework of their respective alliances, such as the Crain’s Group in case of India and the Developed countries in case of USA.