Basic questions unanswered

My arguments on the common interests of agri-biz MNCs and the green lobby may be of ‘street-fighter’ quality.

But those championing against GM technology or the use of pesticides have no real answers to some fundamental issues concerning ordinary farmers. I shall raise only two of them:

Why is it that the Stockholm Convention only ends up banning generic pesticides and not proprietary new-generation insecticide molecules developed by global crop protection chemical majors?

If endosulfan was such a poisoning chemical, why have no large-scale health disorders or deaths been reported from States with maximum usage (Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal), as opposed to Kerala where consumption even at its peak was limited to a few kilo-litres?

Only a decade ago, neonicotinoids were hailed for showing reduced toxicity compared with previously used organochlorine, organophosphate, carbamate or synthetic pyrethroid insecticides.

But the European Union has only recently banned neonicotinoids for apparently causing high risk to honey bee colonies.

Isn’t it too much of a coincidence that this is happening only now, when the patents on these chemicals held by the likes of Bayer and Syngenta have or are set to expire?

Clearly, there is a convergence here of MNC business and environmental lobby interests. It is also reason to believe that the Stockholm Convention and other similar global treaties are driven by these very interests.

As a reasonably well-travelled agricultural reporter, I have never seen “non-pesticidal, low-cost alternatives” to be a “rage” among Indian farmers. For them, crop damage from insects and other pests are not an abstract, but livelihood-threatening problem.

They will continue to use pesticides. The green lobby, which is largely European funded, will ensure that farmers will only spray expensive proprietary chemicals of Bayer, Syngenta or DuPont. And you can’t blame them, for ‘alternative’/organic agriculture is something that only we city-slickers with ‘alternative’ incomes can talk about.

A problem of monopoly

The second issue is GM technology. If it has “mauled the life out of the Indian farmer”, how has area under cotton in India increased since 2002 from less than 8 million to over 12 million hectares now, with Bt hybrids accounting for over 90 per cent?

Clearly, this wouldn’t have happened unless farmers saw some value in Bt technology; nor would they have been under some collective delusion to plant these year after year.

The problem lies not with Bt cotton technology, but monopoly: 95 per cent of the hybrids grown today in India are based on Monsanto’s proprietary Bollgard technology.

By blocking trials of new technologies/events, including those developed by public sector institutions, the greens will again ensure that Monsanto’s monopoly is perpetuated.

That’s ‘real’ convergence of interests for you.

Also read: >Stop bad-mouthing anti-GM groups

COMMENT NOW