If India Opens Its Dairy to America, Who Pays the Price?

See All News by Ravish Kumar

If India opens its dairy sector to the United States, Indian farmers could lose one lakh crore rupees.

This is not an opposition slogan.
This is not a protest pamphlet.

This comes from a report by the State Bank of India.

The discussion began last July.
America wants India to open its dairy sector.
India says the sector is “protected.”

But assurances are not policies.

Outside Parliament, farmers are holding banners.
One of them reads: “Crude deal.”

Why?

Because American farmers receive subsidies ranging from 50% to 215% on products like sugar, rice, coffee, and dairy.

Now pause for a second.

Where does the Indian farmer stand in this picture?
And where does the American farmer stand?

An Indian farmer cannot compete with American farmers on his own strength.
Not with ₹6,000 a year under PM-Kisan.
Not with rising input costs.
Not with MSP already running 30–40% below market reality.

Then why the hurry?

Why were NDA MPs garlanding the Prime Minister before even seeing the draft of the deal?

It looked like a pre-wedding ceremony.
Except this wasn’t a wedding.
It was a trade deal.

And naturally, the opposition will ask:
If American agricultural and dairy products enter India,
what happens to Indian farmers?

The Trump administration’s press secretary has already said:
India will import American oil, agriculture, energy, and transport goods worth $500 billion.

That is not a small number.
That is a mountain.

So one must ask:
What kind of trade deal is this,
where imports seem to flow in only one direction?

Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal told the media that India will buy American goods every year.
He explained it in a circular way.

Boeing orders.
Aircraft engines.
Spare parts.

“Add them up,” he said,
“and it becomes $70–80 billion. Maybe $100 billion.”

So let’s be clear.
If $100 billion is going into aviation alone,
why is the US Agriculture Secretary celebrating?

Brooke Rollins said openly:
“This deal is a big win for American farmers.”

She didn’t whisper it.
She didn’t hide it in fine print.

She said American farm products will be exported to India’s massive market.
Prices will rise.
Cash flow will increase in rural America.

Now let’s ask a simple question.

If cash flows into rural America,
where does it flow from?

Obviously—from Indian farmers.

So why are Indian ministers not addressing this directly?

After Rollins’ statement, Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan issued a press note.
He said no compromise will be made with agriculture and dairy interests.

But in the same note, he added:
“No major product will suddenly enter the Indian market.”

That raises another question.

If nothing harmful is coming,
then what exactly is coming?

Ministers say fruits are protected.
America says fruits and vegetables are opened.

America’s trade representative Jamieson Greer told CNBC:
We’ll keep 18% tariffs on Indian goods.
India will reduce tariffs on agriculture, manufacturing, chemicals, and medical devices.

Two versions of the same story.

One says nothing is opened.
The other says several doors are.

Dairy, sugar, rice are not named yet.
But silence doesn’t mean safety.

Remember—
America’s agriculture sector is in crisis.

China restricted imports.
America needs a big new market.

And India is the biggest agricultural market in the world.

This isn’t speculation.
This is public information.

For years, American farm lobbies pressured the U.S. Trade Representative to open India’s markets.
They argued India’s MSP violates WTO limits.
They objected to India’s food stockholding for the poor.

Their logic was simple:
Open India’s market.
Let American grain feed Indian hunger.

India resisted.
And that resistance was admirable.

But now, after Donald Trump’s return,
WTO processes look shaken.

It feels like a one-man WTO.

Again, listen carefully to the US Agriculture Secretary’s words.
She says rural America will get cash inflow.

That cash doesn’t come from the sky.
It comes at someone else’s cost.

Why doesn’t the Indian government talk about this openly?

Instead, press notes are filled with emotional phrases:
Annadata.
Jeevandata.
Farmer equals God.

But questions remain unanswered.

Tariffs are being cut.
Imports rise.
Exports are promised—but with no guarantees.

Harish Damodaran wrote in The Indian Express:
Between January and November last year, agricultural imports from the US rose 34%.

Soybean oil.
Cotton.
Almonds.

When cotton tariffs were cut to zero,
prices fell by ₹1,100 in two days.

Textile companies were happy.
Cotton farmers were not.

These are not the same people.

OECD reports show Indian farmers lost ₹111 lakh crore over 25 years.

This is already a sector in crisis.

Opening markets further without safeguards is not reform.
It is surrender.

Let me repeat something I have said before:

Importing food is importing unemployment.

India doesn’t need production for the masses.
India needs production by the masses.

Cheap food is not cheap if livelihoods collapse.

Apple farming in Himachal and Kashmir.
Cotton in Maharashtra.
Soybean in central India.

These are not statistics.
These are lives.

Farmers are waiting.
They are asking:
If decisions are taken in our interest,
why can’t details be shared?

What is being hidden?

According to Piyush Goyal, the deal may be finalised by mid-March.

There is still time.

Time to explain.
Time to consult.
Time to protect.

Because when a farmer loses his livelihood,
no consumer discount can compensate for that loss.

Namaskar.
I’m Ravish Kumar.