We are living in the world of hyper-morality wherein everything in public domain is judged by moral posturing of sensitivity towards the issue. The question of objective truth and the rule of law are standing at the intersection of this hyper- morality. And guess what, who is leading this band of hyper-moralists, it is the coterie of the left leaning journalists, academia and politicians masquerading as the torch bearers of justice. Taking example of the farm laws recently passed by the Parliament. Those who were the firm believers that opening the agriculture market for private players, now stand at the crossroads with the government and are vehemently opposing the three farm acts. The evolution of these farm acts was a gradual and a participatory process spread across two decades with the involvement of at-least three Prime Ministers over a period of 20 years. In fact, a call for reforming the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) or Mandis, as we know it, was communicated to the states by the then Prime Minister – Dr. Manmohan Singh in 2012.
Almost 50% of our workforce is engaged in agriculture but it’s share in country’s GDP is a meagre 17%. This disproportionate equation has been a worry for policymakers. If you look at the average land holding in India it stands at 1.08 hectares in 2015-2016 as compared to 2.00 hectares in 1976-1977. Redistribution of land among family members has decreased the average land holding. As per the 10th Agriculture census, Small and Marginal farmers (owning less than 2 hectares of land) account for 86.2% (126 million) of the total farming community in India. Together these 126 million farmers own 74 million hectares of land i.e. 0.6 hectare per farmer. The challenge in front of government is to increase the incomes of these small and marginal farmers who holds miniscule piece of land and are undergoing financial distress. The large-scale migration to the villages owing to COVID 19 has further stressed the agrarian system.
The humongous task in front of the current leadership of the country was to increase the farmers income. The new farm acts duly passed by the parliament propose to open the agriculture market for private players giving the opportunities to farmers to sell there produce in an open market. As of today, they have only one option to sell their produce to govt regulated APMC’s which have become cartels of middlemen and a source of corruption. Before we discuss further let us understand the acts that were passed by the government.
FARMERS PRODUCE TRADE AND COMMERCE (PROMOTION AND FACILITATION) ACT, 2020
The thrust of this legislation is to create an open market in agriculture. It is meant to break the shackles of the mandis and bring the farmers out of the mandi-middleman nexus. The statement of objects and reasons of the bill reads as “to provide for the creation of an ecosystem where the farmers and the traders enjoy the freedom of choice relating to sale and purchase of farmer’s produce”. The statement is self explanatory and the only effect of this legislation is to increase the market space and not decrease the existing space.
Notably, there is no provision in this legislation which effectively affects the existence of mandis. It is about giving more choice to those who do not want to participate in the monopolistic mandi system. It is a sound principle of economics and competition law that the government must endeavour to reduce monopolistic practices in all spheres of economic activity. It is a step in that direction.
ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES (AMENDMENT ACT), 2020
The Essential Commodities Act, historically, operated like a check on malpractices including illegal stocking of commodities which have been declared as essential by the government. In the post-independence period, this Act was instrumental in securing essential commodities for all members of the society as the available resources were extremely limited and such stringent measures were needed. Today, the scenario is different. We are amongst the largest producers of major agricultural crops. This Act of 2020 removes restrictions on stockpiling to ensure that private players take interest in agricultural operations and it becomes a profitable business. However, to prevent abuse of stockpiling, the Act states that stocking limits will be imposed if retail price is increased by 100% (for horticultural produce) and by 50% (for non-perishable food stuff).
FARMERS (EMPOWERMENT AND PROTECTION) AGREEMENT ON PRICE ASSURANCE AND FARM SERVICES ACT, 2020
This Act provides for contract farming. It enables the farmer to freely enter into contracts with other entities including agro firms, wholesalers, processors, individuals etc. and settle the terms of the engagement as per their mutual understanding and consent. The Act does not compel any farmer to engage in a prior contract; rather, it merely enables the farmers to do so under the protective umbrella of the Act. The Act provides a machinery for giving effect to such contracts and addresses the possibility of dispute resolution at the local level by mediation. At best, it is an enabling legislation and not a disabling one. Those who do not wish to engage in contract farming and want to sell their produce at traditional mandi level are free to do so.
PROTEST AGAINST THE ACTS
Even after 73 years of Independence, agriculture remains one of the sectors devoid of any private participation. The passing of these acts has been termed as a “watershed moment” in Indian agriculture history. No less than International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) chief Gita Gopinath lauded the government’s efforts and said that the laws will help in increasing the farmers income. But the series of protest against these acts have made their implementation difficult. The National Capital is seized by the protestors from three main borders, Tikri, Singhu and Ghazipur. The violence unleashed by the protesting farmers on the Republic Day is still fresh in the public memory. Government went an extra step by giving them written guarantee for MSP but even after 9 rounds of talks with the government the stalemate between govt and “farmer leaders” seems unending.
The farmers protest also elicited support from some international celebrities who seem to be completely unaware of the realities that the Indian farmers face, or even of the farmers of their own respective countries. They are sitting atop their bandwagon of activism and hyper-morality from where everything seems to be a result of oppressive policies of a democratically elected government. But what they are not able to comprehend is number of people sitting at the borders blocking the national highways are way smaller than the number of suicides committed by farmers in India every year (10,281 farmers committed suicide in 2019). The cartels of mandis and middlemen is one of the reasons of the delipidated state of Indian farmers which are in place since last 73 years resulting in volatile agriculture growth in last decade from 5.8% in 2005-06 to 0.4% in 2009-10 and -0.2% in 2014-15.
When reforms are being undertaken which aims at improving the farmers income by giving them an option to sell their produce in an open market, compulsion and strong urge for moral posturing irrespective of going into the details of the acts have made these celebrities comment on the issue. Take an example of “environmental activist” Greta Thunberg, although her “designation” “environmental activist” is an oxymoron since nothing substantial could be found to justify her environmental activist credentials apart from blabbering “How dare you”. If you look at the farming pattern in Punjab it in environmentally unsustainable in so many ways, whether it is absence of crop diversification, decreasing water table in the state or rampant use of pesticides in crops which is largely driven by APMC and govt supported Minimum Support Produce (MSP) to paddy and wheat. Rallying in support of such rampant degradation of environment by an “environmental activist” is what is difficult to understand. Peaceful protests are a lifeline of an active and thriving democracy but when people with vested interests or “professional protestors”, take over the peaceful protest and start steering it towards a hateful, vengeful and violent path against the state we must tackle those forces.
CANADIAN POLITICS AND ECHOES OF FARMER PROTEST
Canadian PM’s uncalled stance on Farmers protest received irk from most of the Indian Media outlets and MEA for interfering in India’s internal matter. Even one of the MP’s from his party visited the protest site at singhu border. The comment made by Justin ‘Singh’ Trudeau, as he popularly known in Indian Sikh Diaspora in Canada, has its roots in Canadian Politics. Rise of the NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who is a Khalistan Sympathiser, has emerged as a prominent figure in the Canadian Politics. He is the first Sikh to lead a major Canadian Federal Political Party. In an interview with Terry Milewski, when he was asked to, he didn’t condemn Talwinder Singh Parmar who was responsible for Air India bombing killing 329 people. He has attended several programs and processions where posters, pictures, banners of Jarnail Singh Bhindrewala, Talwinder Parmar are a common sighting. A great orator with neo-marxist views, he is able to woo many Sikh votes which represent a sizeable voter block. Now the fight is between Trudeau’s Liberal party and Singh’s NDP to lure the Sikh votes. But what Trudeau doesn’t understand is that in order to gain some low hanging fruits he is jeopardizing the relations between India and Canada. During his tenure, relations between India and Canada have hit the rock bottom.
There are no takers of Khalistan movement in India or even in Punjab. The trauma and pain faced by the Sikh community and the Punjabis during the militancy is still afresh in their minds. As perfectly explained by Terry Milewski in his report “Khalistan: A project of Pakistan”, published by Canadian think tank Macdonald-Laurier Institute, it is Pakistan who is fuelling secessionist group abroad. The aim of carving out Khalistan from India is admitted no other than by the then Prime Minister of Pakistan Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. In 1973 Bhutto said that they will carve out a piece of India to avenge 1971 war. “Pakistan will also have a Bangladesh carved out of India,” Bhutto promised to a group of journalists, “except it will be on Pakistan’s border.”
The proclivity of Trudeau’s government towards Khalistan secessionists has been a matter of debate even in Canada. Ujjwal Dosanjh, a Sikh and member of Trudeau’s Liberal Party, who served as Canada’s first Indo-Canadian premier in British Columbia, from 2000-01, and federal minister of health in Paul Martin’s government from 2004-06, had questioned the Trudeau’s administration invite to Jaspal Atwal during Trudeau’s visit to India. “You what? Do we have no shame?” Dosanjh tweeted. “Khalistan has seeped deep into the veins of this administration.”
Jaspal Atwal is the member of now-banned militant group International Sikh Youth Federation. He was involved in assassination attempt on Malkiat Singh Sidhu, former Planning Minister in Punjab Government in 1986, while he was visiting Canada for his nephew’s wedding. He was shot during the assassination attempt but survived. Five years later he was shot again in Punjab where he took his last breath. Jaspal Atwal was convicted in the assassination attempt and was sentenced to 20 years in jail. A year before that in 1985 he also attacked Ujjwal Dosanjh because of his strong views against Sikh extremism. Dosanjh was severely injured during the attack with a broken hand and 80 stitches.
These reasons deemed sufficient by PM Narendra Modi for the royal snub given to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on his 2018 official visit to India which was an unusual stance taken by the PM of India. Usually, PM Modi himself reaches Airport to welcome the leaders and yes, who can forget about the Modi Hugs! But when it comes to sovereignty and unity of our country PM Modi is a no non-sense man. What Trudeau needs to understand is that internal Politics and Foreign Policy sometimes sails in two different boats, and you have to navigate them with extra precaution failing to do that can lead to catastrophic results.
The writer is Assistant Professor at Special Centre for National Security Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
There are no takers of Khalistan movement in India or even in Punjab. The trauma faced by the Sikh community and the Punjabis during the militancy is still afresh in their minds. As perfectly explained by Terry Milewski in his report ‘Khalistan: A project of Pakistan’, published by Canadian think tank Macdonald-Laurier Institute, it is Pakistan which is fuelling the secessionist group abroad.
