Indian farmers, unions strike against new trade deal with US

Indian farmers join a trade union protest in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, Feb. 12, 2026. (Indian Farmers Union)
Short Url
Updated 12 February 2026
Follow

Indian farmers, unions strike against new trade deal with US

  • India agreed to eliminate or reduce tariffs on US industrial goods, wide range of farm, food products
  • Commerce minister says farmers will not suffer ‘any harm’ as deal is ‘fair, equitable, and balanced’

NEW DELHI: Indian farmers took part in nationwide trade union protests on Thursday, saying they fear the implications of New Delhi’s new trade pact with the US, which will result in American products gaining duty-free access to the Indian market.

Agriculture provides livelihoods for more than 40 percent of India’s 1.4 billion population, and opening the sector to foreign competition has long been politically sensitive.

India signed an interim framework of the US trade deal last week, with the formal pact being expected to be finalized by March. The US cut its 50 percent duty on Indian goods to 18 percent, while India agreed to eliminate or reduce tariffs on all US industrial goods and a wide range of farm and food products.

While details of the agreement have not yet been announced, farmers fear being undercut by cheap, subsidized American products which will threaten their livelihood.

Rakesh Tikait, national spokesman for the Bharatiya Kisan Union (Indian Farmers’ Union) said the government had not held discussions with farmers before agreeing to the deal.

The BKU and other rural platforms have joined a broader strike held across India by major trade unions opposed to new labor codes — which have been criticized for weakening workers’ rights and reducing job security — as they saw common cause with other workers.

“We are protesting against the US–India trade deal, which we fear goes against the larger interests of Indian farmers. If US farm goods, fishery products, and dairy products hit the Indian market, Indian farmers cannot withstand this onslaught and would be ruined,” Tikait told Arab News from a protest site in Western Uttar Pradesh.

“We want this deal to be changed and made pro-farmer. Otherwise we will oppose it tooth and nail.”

According to Rajveer Singh Jadaun, president of the farmers’ union in Uttar Pradesh, the agriculture sector is facing an “existential threat” in a country that historically imposes tariffs of 30–150 percent on imports to protect farmers.

With tariffs reduced or eliminated and those imposed on Indian products higher than before, protesting farmers are convinced there is no level playing field.

“The deal is giving a zero percent tariff to the US’ agricultural and other products and we are charged 18 percent, which is higher than the 3 percent in the past,” Jadaun said.

“American farmers are celebrating the deal — that means there is something fishy … The government is speaking in many voices and that creates further confusion. I would like the government to clarify the stand and make everything clear.”

Prices of Indian corn and soybean have already fallen by 4 percent and 10 percent respectively, following the deal’s announcement.

P. Krishna Prasad, finance secretary of the All India Farmers’ Union, predicted that prices of other products may soon fall, too.

“They are bringing fresh and processed fruits. If apples are being brought at 75 rupees ($1) per kilo to India from America, then the apple economy of Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh will collapse,” he said.

“In America, there are only 1.7 million farmers, but in India there are 166 million farmer households. And in America, one farmer household is getting a 60 lakh rupees ($73,000) subsidy per year. In India, that is nearly 27,000 rupees ($330) per year. There is no level playing field. Indian farmers cannot compete with these highly motorized or mechanized farms of America.”

While Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal has addressed the protesters — saying that they “will not suffer any harm” as the trade deal is “fair, equitable, and balanced” —  Prasad warned they were prepared to stage a strike similar to the 2020-21 protest, in which they opposed three farm acts that sought to open the sector to corporations.

The strike, that lasted nearly 18 months, involved millions of protesters and was India’s largest and longest in recent times. It forced the government to repeal the contested legislation.

“America will dictate Indian policy, so the sovereignty of the Indian people and the country is totally being compromised,” Prasad said.

“We feel this is a total surrender of Indian farmers and Indian agriculture to imperialist, multinational corporations. We cannot accept it. We will stop it. We will come to the streets and build this agitation bigger than the 2021 farmers’ agitation.”


Ratcliffe says he is sorry his UK ‘colonized by immigrants’ remark offended some

Updated 6 sec ago
Follow

Ratcliffe says he is sorry his UK ‘colonized by immigrants’ remark offended some

LONDON: British billionaire Jim Ratcliffe said on Thursday he was sorry he had ​offended some people by saying the country had been “colonized by immigrants,” after Prime Minister Keir Starmer joined a chorus of criticism over the remarks.
Ratcliffe, one of Britain’s most successful businessmen, responded to the outcry with a statement saying it was important to raise the issue of immigration, but that he regretted his “choice of language” had caused concern.
The founder of chemicals giant INEOS, and owner of nearly a third of Manchester United, had told Sky News that high migration and people living on benefits were damaging the economy.
Finance minister: Comments were “disgusting”
“You can’t have an economy with nine million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in. I mean, the UK has been colonized — it’s ‌costing too much ‌money,” Ratcliffe said in the interview aired on Wednesday.
“The UK has been ​colonized ‌by immigrants, ⁠really, ​hasn’t ⁠it?” he added.
Starmer said the remarks were wrong and would play into the hands of those who wanted to divide the country. Finance minister Rachel Reeves said the comments were “unacceptable” and “disgusting.”
On Thursday, INEOS issued a statement from Ratcliffe in response to “reporting of his comments.”
“I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern but it is important to raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth,” he said.
He said he wanted to stress that governments must manage migration alongside investment in skills, industry and jobs to ensure long-term prosperity ⁠is shared by everyone, and that it was “critical that we maintain an open debate ‌on the challenges facing the UK.”
Starmer’s spokesperson said it was right ‌for him to apologize. Asked if an apology about offense caused rather ​than the comments themselves were enough, the spokesperson said ‌questions on the detail of the apology were for Ratcliffe.
Manchester United fans flag up use of “colonized”
His comments were condemned ‌by politicians, campaigners and by fan groups at Manchester United, including its Muslim Supporters Club who said the term “colonized” was frequently used by far-right activists to frame migrants as invaders.
“Public discourse shapes public behavior,” the group said. “When influential figures adopt language that mirrors extremist talking points, it risks legitimising prejudice and deepening division.”
Others noted that the Manchester United first team was largely made up ‌of international players and staff, and questioned whether Ratcliffe should be commenting on British politics when he had moved to the tax haven Monaco.
Before Ratcliffe’s response, The ⁠Mayor of Greater Manchester ⁠Andy Burnham said Ratcliffe’s comments were inflammatory and should be withdrawn.
Immigration debate has intensified
Immigration has consistently been among the top voter concerns in Britain according to opinion polls, and has helped fuel the rise of Nigel Farage’s right-wing populist party Reform UK.
Rhetoric around immigration has hardened in recent years and a wave of protests broke out last summer outside hotels housing asylum seekers. Widespread rioting also occurred in 2024, sparked by false information circulating online that a teenager who killed three young girls was an Islamist migrant.
Sky said Ratcliffe had cited incorrect figures to back up his argument. He said the population had risen from 58 million to 70 million people since 2020. The Office for National Statistics estimates the UK population was 67 million in mid-2020 and 69 million in mid-2024.
The population was around 59 million in 2000. Ratcliffe and his office did not immediately respond to Reuters questions about the figures he ​used.
Farage responded to the comments by saying that Britain ​had undergone mass immigration that had changed the character of many areas in the country. “Labour may try to ignore that but Reform won’t,” he said.