Washington has indicated that discussions with New Delhi on a bilateral trade framework are advancing, with remarks from Jamieson Greer, the US Trade Representative, describing India’s agricultural proposals as “the best we’ve ever received as a country.” This fresh tone comes as US officials seek to secure expanded access for American farmers to the Indian market, with key focus on commodities such as grain sorghum and soy.
The negotiating momentum builds on a broader push by the US to diversify export destinations as demand from China for staples such as soybeans and corn remains unstable. Analysts note that shifting such supplies toward India could help stabilise US farm incomes.
During a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Greer emphasised that a negotiation team is currently in New Delhi addressing “sensitive agricultural barriers,” a reference to India’s long-standing restrictions on imports including genetically modified grains and strict sanitary norms. He acknowledged that resistance remains on certain row crops, but described the latest proposals from India as “forward-leaning.”
United States pressure is not restricted to farm commodities. Greer hinted that talks on non-agricultural sectors — such as civil-aviation parts under the 1979 Aircraft Agreement — are “fairly far advanced.” Washington appears ready to offer reciprocal market access if India agrees to liberalisation beyond agriculture.
For India, the challenge lies in balancing domestic political realities with international expectations. Government officials have repeatedly stressed the need to safeguard millions of small farmers and avoid one-sided concessions in agriculture — especially where imports could disrupt local markets. The stance has meant that, while discussions continue on grains and oilseeds, full liberalisation appears unlikely, especially for genetically modified imports.
On the US side, the urgency is driven by economic and political pressure faced by farmers hit by reduced exports to China, elevated inventories, and volatile global demand. The proposed deal with India offers a potential outlet, but also carries risk: acceptance of GM grains or easing sanitary restrictions could provoke opposition within India from farmers’ unions and political constituencies worried about livelihoods and food security — a faultline that negotiators must navigate carefully.
The trajectory of these negotiations suggests that Washington is recalibrating its global trade strategy, seeking to offset agricultural-market disruptions from China by courting alternative partners such as India, while pushing for broader access across sectors. Whether New Delhi’s cautious stance and protective agricultural policies yield enough concessions to secure a deal remains the critical question.
Supreme Court concerned at threats to booth-level officers 