[CTC] Peasant Unions in Indonesia and India Sound Alarm, Warn of Erosion of Food Sovereignty

[Arthur Stamoulis]

US Trade Deals: Peasant Unions in Indonesia and India Sound Alarm, Warn of
Erosion of Food Sovereignty
23 July 2025

Small-scale farmers and peasant unions in both India and Indonesia have
raised strong objections to their respective governments’ ongoing and
recently concluded trade negotiations with the United States, citing
threats to food sovereignty, domestic agricultural livelihoods, and rural
economies. While India is in the *middle of negotiating a trade agreement
with the US*
<https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-us-trade-deal-deadlock-over-agri-continues-but-trump-surprise-not-ruled-out/article69842403.ece>,
Indonesia has *already entered into a deal
<https://paradigmfutures.net/a/news/us-indonesia-trade-agreement-agriculture-energy/>*
 that grants American agricultural goods duty-free access—moves that
farmers say will lead to long-term dependency and harm.

In Indonesia, the peasant union Serikat Petani Indonesia (SPI) issued a
*statement*
<https://spi.or.id/kesepakatan-dagang-indonesia-amerika-serikat-membuat-ketergantungan-pangan-kedaulatan-pangan-harus-ditegakkan/>
 criticizing the recent bilateral trade deal that eliminates tariffs on US
agricultural imports, *worth up to $4 billion*
<https://voi.id/en/economy/496308>. This waiver, SPI argues, will
drastically increase imports of soybeans, wheat, dairy, beef, and
cotton—commodities already dominated by US suppliers. For soybeans alone,
90% of Indonesia’s consumption already comes from the US. With the new
agreement, agricultural imports are projected to surge by 55%, worsening
Indonesia’s trade deficit and deepening dependence on foreign food supplies.

SPI warned that the trade agreement not only undermines the government’s
stated goal of food self-sufficiency, as outlined in President Prabowo’s
Asta Cita policy vision, but also contradicts Indonesia’s own national laws
such as the Food Law No. 16/2012 and Peasant Protection Law No. 19/2013. It
further breaches the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Peasants (UNDROP), they said.

“Food is not just a commodity; it is a right and a sovereign matter. These
trade concessions are paving the way for foreign agribusiness to dominate
our food systems, sidelining local producers,” reads the statement.

The union also drew parallels with the EU-Indonesia trade negotiations,
where intellectual property clauses reportedly push Indonesia to join
UPOV-1991, a plant variety protection regime criticized for restricting
farmers’ rights to exchange and develop local seeds.

Across the Indian Ocean, Indian farmers are *voicing*
<https://indianexpress.com/article/business/farmers-body-warns-against-us-deal-says-protests-will-intensify-if-concerns-ignored-10131210/>
 similar anxieties. On 15 July, the Indian Coordination Committee of
Farmers Movements (ICCFM), a coalition representing farmers across 12
states, sent a detailed *letter*
<https://www.bilaterals.org/?letter-the-indian-government-must> to Commerce
Minister Piyush Goyal, opposing the India-US trade negotiations and urging
the government not to sign even an interim Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
involving agriculture.

The ICCFM warned that the inclusion of agriculture in any such deal would
open India’s markets to heavily subsidized US agricultural products, which
would destabilize local prices and devastate millions of small farmers.

The 2024 Farm Bill has a projected cost of $1.5 trillion and a large
portion of it is directed toward farm programs and crop insurance—that
benefits the large, wealthy farms in US that are part of the export chain1
<https://viacampesina.org/en/2025/07/us-trade-deals-peasant-unions-in-indonesia-and-india-sound-alarm-warn-of-erosion-of-food-sovereignty/#sdfootnote1sym>.
These products come into export markets like India at artificially low
prices, creating unfair competition for our farmers,” the letter noted.

Of particular concern is the dairy sector, which supports over 80 million
Indian farmers. The State Bank of India recently *warned
<https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/opening-india-s-dairy-sector-to-us-could-cause-rs-1-03-lakh-crore-loss-to-dairy-farmers-sbi-report/ar-AA1Izjbd>*
 that opening the dairy sector to US imports could cause an annual loss of
₹1.03 lakh crore, lead to a 15% drop in milk prices, and endanger the
livelihoods of women and landless dairy farmers. The ICCFM further pointed
to ethical and safety concerns, including the US practice of feeding
livestock blood meal and genetically modified (GM) feed—unacceptable to
many Indian consumers and producers.

The letter also highlighted sector-by-sector threats:

   - Grains: Duty-free imports of maize, wheat, and rice could depress
   prices below Minimum Support Price (MSP) levels and flood markets with GM
   varieties.


   - Edible Oils: India’s self-sufficiency in oilseeds has been undercut by
   successive duty reductions. Recent cuts from 20% to 10% benefit large
   importers while marginalizing domestic growers.


   - Apples and Nuts: A steep rise in US imports after duty cuts threatens
   orchard farmers in the Himalayan belt.


   - Cotton and Poultry: Surging US imports, often rerouted due to its
   trade war with China, are displacing Indian producers.


   - Synthetic Rubber and Sugar: Similar trends threaten natural rubber
   producers and India’s sugar industry.

A recurring concern in both countries is the potential erosion of seed
sovereignty through intellectual property clauses often embedded in US
trade deals. The ICCFM cautioned against any concessions on farmers’ rights
to save, reuse, and exchange seeds, saying such changes would trigger
nationwide protests.

The ICCFM also criticized the hypocrisy of US positions at the WTO. “The US
objects to India’s public procurement system while it shields its own farm
subsidies with billions. The level playing field does not exist,” their
statement said. *OECD studies*
<https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/agricultural-policy-monitoring-and-evaluation-2023_b14de474-en/full-report/india_59f4672a.html>
 have shown Indian farmers receive negative support overall, while American
producers are massively underwritten by state support and infrastructure.

The resistance to US-led trade liberalization from both Indian and
Indonesian farmers is notable not only for its timing but also its
misplaced priorities, as per the unions. While policymakers in both
countries frame these deals as opportunities for economic integration,
small-scale farmers view them as lopsided arrangements that benefit
multinational agribusiness at the cost of local producers.
------------------------------

1
<https://viacampesina.org/en/2025/07/us-trade-deals-peasant-unions-in-indonesia-and-india-sound-alarm-warn-of-erosion-of-food-sovereignty/#sdfootnote1anc>
 *A report from the American Enterprise Institute highlights this
disparity, revealing that the top 10% of farms receive 56.4% of all crop
insurance subsidies, with the top 5% receiving 36.4%. Since these subsidies
are not means-tested—and the level of subsidies is directly proportional to
an agribusiness’s production levels—the wealthiest and largest businesses
capture the most significant share of these benefits.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20250724/b8e8e834/attachment-0001.htm>