New Delhi, February 15, 2026 — Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Sunday escalated his criticism of the Modi government's recent interim trade deal with the United States, accusing it of betraying Indian farmers and potentially compromising the country's agricultural sovereignty. In a detailed post on X (formerly Twitter), Gandhi posed five "simple" yet sharp questions directly to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, demanding clarity on provisions related to agricultural imports, genetically modified (GM) crops, and long-term impacts on domestic farmers.
The India-US interim trade framework, announced earlier this month, includes commitments from India to reduce or eliminate tariffs on a range of US agricultural products, such as Distillers Dried Grains (DDG), sorghum, pulses, and others. The deal aims to boost bilateral trade amid ongoing negotiations, but it has sparked widespread concern among farmer groups, particularly over potential market flooding by cheaper US imports and the introduction of GM products.
Gandhi, who has been vocal against the pact since its details emerged, described the developments as "a betrayal of India's farmers in the name of a US trade deal." He emphasized that the issue extends beyond immediate economics to the future of India's agricultural independence, questioning whether the government is allowing long-term foreign control over the sector.
The five questions posed by Rahul Gandhi are as follows:
1. What does importing DDG (Distillers Dried Grains) actually mean? Does it mean that Indian livestock will be fed distillers’ grain made from GM American maize? Won’t this effectively make our dairy products dependent on the American agricultural industry?
2. If we allow imports of GM soya oil, what will happen to our soya farmers in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, and across the country? How will they cope with yet another price shock?
3. When you say “additional products”, what exactly does that include? Is this a sign of future pressure to open up pulses and other sensitive crops to American imports over time?
4. What does removing “non-trade barriers” mean? Will there be pressure on India in the future to loosen its stance on GM crops, weaken procurement, or reduce MSP (Minimum Support Price) and bonuses?
5. Once this door is open, how will we stop it from opening wider every year? Will there be safeguards, or will more and more crops be gradually put on the table in every deal?
Gandhi concluded by stressing that "farmers deserve clarity" on these matters, framing the deal as a threat to India's sovereign decision-making in agriculture.
The post drew significant attention, with supporters echoing concerns about the vulnerability of smallholder farmers to global market pressures. It aligns with ongoing farmer protests and criticisms from unions, who argue that tariff reductions could exacerbate income volatility without adequate protections like strengthened procurement or MSP guarantees.
In response, Union Home Minister Amit Shah dismissed Gandhi's claims, accusing the Congress leader of misleading people and spreading lies about trade agreements, including those with the US, EU, and UK. Shah asserted that the deal benefits national interests and that opposition criticisms are politically motivated.
The controversy highlights broader tensions in India-US trade relations, where agricultural access remains a sensitive sticking point. Farmer organizations have called for nationwide discussions, and some have threatened further agitation if safeguards are not explicitly addressed.
As the debate intensifies, all eyes are on the government's response to Gandhi's questions, with potential implications for upcoming parliamentary sessions and bilateral talks. Farmers' groups continue to demand transparency to ensure that any trade gains do not come at the expense of domestic agricultural livelihoods.
For More News Updates Follow Us On www.tconews.in
