No more concessions

Farmers' intransigence, invasion of Delhi are unacceptable

India’s Republic Day is a festive occasion, but on this iteration of the national festival, divisions in the country’s polity were on open and tragic display. The agitating farmers, who received permission to hold a tractor rally inside Delhi city limits after being at the border for months, broke out of the previously agreed route and went so far as to storm the Red Fort’s ramparts and raise a religious flag there. This is an unacceptable escalation of a previously peaceful protest even after the government has offered to hold the new laws in abeyance. As more information emerges, it may be that there were also provocations from the Delhi Police. But the fact remains that the farmers’ unions gave an undertaking that the tractor rally would be peaceful, and a mechanism to raise awareness rather than to intimidate the nation’s capital. This is of a piece with the intransigence that the unions have displayed in their negotiations, where they have taken an “all or nothing” approach with the government.

There is no question that the moral standing of the farmers has been dented. That is the inevitable product of such lawlessness, which solves nothing in a democratic country and indeed hardens opinions on the other side. Questions must also be asked of the Delhi Police, which allowed the demonstrators to penetrate as far as the Red Fort. They should have anticipated such an outcome. If anything, what reflects most poorly is the contrast with their open and shocking brutality last year at this time during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act. If they are guilty of ineptitude now, it sets off the degree of their impunity last year.

It is time for the agitating farmers to introspect as to what their endgame is. The fact is that, if not now, agricultural reform will arrive in the next few years. The opportunity given by the government to put the recent amendments on hold for 18 months allows the farmers to demand a proper transition to other forms of support, or some form of guarantees from the government of continued benefits for the farming sector that take a form more sustainable than the current mechanisms. The government has in fact already conceded far too much ground. It cannot roll back the laws as being demanded by the agitating farmers. The government should also release a clear road map on minimum support prices — the Food Corporation of India is not just a state-controlled company but one with debt that is being bought widely. As the company’s owner, the government must address its inevitable transition away from over-purchase of wheat and rice. This will have the additional benefit of giving farmers a timeline to adapt. All other outstanding complaints from the farmers can be discussed while the law is in abeyance.

Yet the ultimate responsibility for this tragic impasse lies with the government. The laws were passed without sufficient democratic discussion in the proper forum: Parliament. If democratic forms of debate are not honoured, then undemocratic forms of protest can always emerge. The government must also learn a lesson from its mishandling of this reform. The impasse on the farm laws and violence in Delhi could have been avoided.