No end to farm economy unease
Jagjit Singh Dallewal, 70, has been on a 40-day hunger strike in Punjab, highlighting farmers' demands for MSP and debt waivers amid escalating tensions.
Jagjit Singh Dallewal, the 70-year-old leader of the Bharti Kisan Union Ekta Sidhupur in Punjab, has now been on a hunger strike for 40 days. Despite his failing health, and the threat it poses to not just Dallewal’s physical well-being but also the overall peace and tranquillity in Punjab, the Union and Punjab governments have been passing the buck instead of doing anything concrete to resolve the situation. The Supreme Court said this in unambiguous terms while hearing the matter on January 2.

In many ways, the situation is a reflection of the unease in the farm sector, particularly in its erstwhile prosperous and prestigious Green Revolution region.
Dallewal’s hunger strike began after the protesting farmers in Punjab were refused permission to march to Delhi to press their demands, which included guaranteed Minimum Support Prices (MSP) and debt waivers. To be sure, farmers from this region have been on the warpath ever since the Union government brought in ordinances to introduce three farm laws during the pandemic. While the farmers got the government to repeal the laws after a year of camping outside the national capital, they have not made much headway in their attempt to get the government to accept demands such as guaranteed MSPs. Seen objectively, this is not necessarily a bad outcome.
There is a widespread argument among economists, including those who have been sympathetic to farmers’ movements, that farm loan waivers are at best palliatives to the entrenched agrarian distress. Similarly, any demand for guaranteed MSP by farmers, especially in states such as Punjab and Haryana, is ill-advised for two reasons. Blanket MSP coverage will entail an end to private food markets in the country. This is impractical. More procurements for farmers in states such as Punjab and Haryana will only worsen an already skewed distribution of fiscal resources towards farmers in this region. Even if one were to make a case for expanding the procurement net outside rice and wheat to crops such as pulses and oilseeds, the new regime should be diversified across crops and regions.
None of these points should be very difficult to convey in an objective, transparent and democratic dialogue between farmers and the government. But while the farmers have taken a my-way-or-highway approach, the Union government has been unable to initiate an honest big-picture conversation. Of course, there have been occasional electoral concessions. Wherever state governments have been acting as agent provocateurs rather than trying to defuse the situation — the Punjab government’s conduct in the Dallewal episode can be described so — we are walking the knife’s edge between perpetual protests and large-scale outburst triggered by a potential mishap.
States such as Punjab have played a sheet anchor role in India’s food security in the last many decades. However, Punjab’s farms need to change if they are to remain viable and relevant going forward. It is also a state that has had a troubled past, with the peasantry providing a fertile recruitment ground for sectarian movements. A perception of the state trying to strong-arm the peasantry at a time of growing economic hardship is bound to give a fillip to sectarian and anarchist tendencies.
Governments — in Delhi and Punjab — should take all this into account and try to engage the farmers in a conversation. The country’s food security and national security are at stake.
All Access.
One Subscription.
Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines
to 100 year archives.



HT App & Website
