India

Promising Potential? Why India Poses the Biggest Opportunity for Trade, But Also the Biggest Challenge

Wed, 23 Apr 2025 15:45:48 GMT

As trade tensions continue to impact both commodity and financial markets, the White House says the Trump administration is making progress on additional trade deals. The news comes as Vice President JD Vance was in the middle of a four-day visit to India, with both countries saying they had made progress in negotiating a bilateral trade deal. Delhi hopes this deal will help it avoid higher tariffs.

Vance announced the U.S. and India have “officially finalized the terms of reference for the trade negotiation.” He called it a “vital step,” saying it sets a roadmap toward a final deal.

India is just one of several trade deals in the works, according to the Trump administration. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday the Trump administration now has “18 proposals on paper” for trade deals.

“You have Secretary Bessent, Secretary Lutnick, Ambassador Greer, NEC Director Hassett and Peter Navarro, the entire trade team meeting with 34 countries this week alone,” Leavitt said in the press briefing. “We are moving at Trump speed to ensure these deals are made on behalf of the American worker and the American people.”

Leavitt also announced “the president and the administration are setting the stage for a deal with China.”

The Wall Street Journal reported the White House is considering slashing tariffs in order to de-escalate the trade war. Currently, tariffs are at 145%, but the White House isn’t considering cutting those to zero. Instead, the Wall Street Journal reports those tariffs will likely fall anywhere between 50% to 65%.

However, Treasury Secretary Bessent declined to comment on that report, saying there’s no unilateral offer from President Trump to cut tariffs on China. He also said it could take two to three years to reach a full trade deal with China.

Progress With India
Before the White House’s 90-day pause on higher tariffs for other countries expires on July 9, India is one country rushing to negotiate a trade deal with the U.S.

Just this week, Vance and Prime Minister Modi announced the t erms of reference for a bilateral trade agreement between the U.S. and India. The progress toward the agreement was a result of the meeting between the two this week.

“I am pleased to confirm that USTR and India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry have finalized the Terms of Reference to lay down a roadmap for the negotiations on reciprocal trade,” Greer said. “There is a serious lack of reciprocity in the trade relationship with India. These ongoing talks will help achieve balance and reciprocity by opening new markets for American goods and addressing unfair practices that harm American workers. India’s constructive engagement so far has been welcomed and I look forward to creating new opportunities for workers, farmers and entrepreneurs in both countries.”

During Vance’s speech in Jaipur prior to that, he said that the two countries had finalized the terms of reference for the negotiation.

“This is a vital step toward realizing President Trump and Prime Minister Modi’s vision because it sets a roadmap toward a final deal between our nations,” Vance said.

India’s Tariffs on U.S. Agriculture Products
India’s tariffs on U.S. agricultural goods are significant, which is a major point of contention in the U.S. and India trade relationship. Walnuts, for example, face a tariff of 100% into India. Vegetable oils have a tariff of up to 45%.

The United States has one of the lowest average applied tariff rates on agricultural products. But many of our trading partners maintain prohibitive tariff rates that constrain export opportunities for American farmers and ranchers.

Unfair and non-reciprocal practices have… pic.twitter.com/mmy5spBEzl
— United States Trade Representative (@USTradeRep) April 23, 2025

The U.S. argues these tariffs are unfair trade barriers, and Mark Knight of Farmer’s Keeper Financial told AgDay the U.S. relationship with India over the years has been complex and strange.

“Sometimes it’s friendly, for the most part. But that’s a giant population, and it would go a long way toward making a potential deal with China less important if we could strike some deals with some of these other countries — especially India. We haven’t had something in place with India for years.”

India Has the Most Potential, But Poses the Biggest Problem
If you want to understand just how problematic India has been for trade in the past, just talk to Gregg Doud. He’s the current CEO of National Milk Producers Federation (NMFP) but served as the chief ag trade negotiator during the first Trump administration.

During an episode of “Unscripted” earlier this year, he said India has the most potential, but is the biggest problem.

Doud says history shows you India has been a problem, as the U.S. essentially kicked India out of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the past. The U.S. did finally agree to allow India back into the WTO, but under certain terms.

“I don’t want what I’m about to say to be seen as being negative toward the discussion between Modi and President Trump earlier this year, but one of the wins we did get in agriculture — which is my understanding based on some conversations — is that India lowered the tariff on U.S. bourbon from 150% to 100%,” Doud says.

He says while that may not have been the only win, it serves as an example for how difficult it is to negotiate with India.

India is a big customer of one main U.S. ag product, though: almonds .

In the 2023/24 crop year, the U.S. exported over 400 million lb. of almonds to India, making it the largest export market for California almonds. This was a 21% increase compared to the previous year. India’s almond imports from the U.S. were valued at $932 million in FY 2023.

India is the United States’ top buyer of almonds.

(U.S. Almond Board )

Doud says India has high tariffs to protect their own farmers.

“Think of it as a half billion farmers in India whose electricity, water, fuel, fertilizer and seed is all subsidized. India wants to keep that out in the country, and if we do anything that drives rural Indian folks into the cities, it would overwhelm them. This is the mindset,” Doud says. “I remind people, it was 5 or 6 years ago that India made a modicum of reforms of their domestic agricultural markets. There was so much unrest over those changes that Modi agreed upon to make, that three years later, they had to repeal the law.”

India’s Tariffs Crushed Apple Exports
U.S. apples are one commodity that has suffered from India’s retaliation in 2018.

“In 2018, India was the No. 2 market for U.S. apples until their retaliatory tariffs crushed our exports to near zero. They are rebounding back, but it might take years to return to the previous levels,” says Jim Bair, president and CEO of the U.S. Apple Association, in an interview with Farm Journal’s The Packer. “If the White House can facilitate that in a trade agreement with India, U.S. Apple wishes them Godspeed, and not a moment too soon.”

U.S. Apple says in 2018, India was the number two market for U.S. apples until retaliatory tariffs crushed their exports to near zero.

(U.S. Apple Association )

Potential With India
As the world’s most populous country, India holds massive potential if a trade deal can be struck. It boasts one of the fastest growing economies in the world with households that are seeing a high levels of consumer spending. That means agricultural products would be more accessible to a larger number of people.

According to USDA , top agricultural prospects for U.S. exporters include:

Cotton
Dairy products
Ethanol
Fresh fruit
Forest products
Processed food and beverages
Pulses
Tree nuts

USDA says in FY 2023, India imported $37 billion of agricultural and related products from across the world, with imports up 51% over the past five years.

“Proportional to its population, India imports a relatively small value of products. Comparatively, China, a country with a similar population size, imported $262.7 billion during the same period. Currently, India ranks behind much lower population countries like Canada and South Korea in total agricultural and related imports. This relatively low level of imports suggests good opportunities for future growth,” the USDA report stated.

Much of the recent growth of imports in India is with vegetable oils, which is the country’s top imported ag product.

USDA says imports of vegetable oil increased by $9 billion, nearly doubling in 5 years, to a total of $18.4 billion in FY 2023.

The United States has occasionally been a supplier of soybean oil to India, but imports face stiff competition from other substitutable oils like palm and sunflower, and from imports from India’s traditional soybean oil suppliers: Argentina and Brazil.

Trump Moves to Impose Reciprocal Tariffs, And It Could Reshape U.S. Trade Policy

Thu, 13 Feb 2025 21:29:59 GMT

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday , directing his administration to impose reciprocal tariffs on foreign countries with high tariffs and non-tariff barriers on U.S. exports.

These customized levies, expected to be finalized by April, are designed to rebalance trade relationships and target unfair practices, including subsidies, regulations, and exchange rate manipulation.

The proposed tariffs will be calculated on a country-by-country basis and could apply broadly to industries such as automobiles, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals. Trump cited the European Union’s value-added tax (VAT) and restrictive regulations as examples of unfair trade practices, along with Japan and South Korea, which he claims have long taken advantage of the U.S.

“Whatever countries charge us, we will charge them back,” Trump said from the Oval Office, declaring the end of what he sees as a one-sided trade relationship. He indicated that additional import taxes beyond reciprocal tariffs would be imposed later.

Of Note:

The Trump Administration will first look at the countries with the highest tariffs on U.S. goods. An official briefing reporters said the tariffs could come into effect in weeks or months.

“For many years the United States has been treated unfairly by trading partners, both friend and foe,” according to a memorandum Trump signed. “This lack of reciprocity is one source of our country’s large and persistent annual trade deficits in goods. I’ve decided, for purposes of fairness, that I will charge a reciprocal tariff, meaning whatever countries charge the United States of America,” Trump said in announcing the new tariffs. “In almost all cases, they’re charging us vastly more than we charge them, but those days are over.”

Trump also said that tariffs on cars, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals in addition to the reciprocal tariffs will come “shortly.”

The official briefing reporters said the aim is to have discussions with countries about how their policies have created a trade imbalance and that Trump would be more than happy to lower tariffs if countries want to pare their tariffs or remove other trade barriers.

Marks a Major Shift in U.S. Trade Strategy

The reciprocal tariff plan marks a sharp departure from the “most favored nation” principle that has guided global trade policy since the post-World War II era. Under this system, all trading partners receive equal treatment unless covered by a specific trade agreement. Trump’s new approach aims to align U.S. tariff policies with those of its trading partners, effectively abandoning this long-standing norm.

Howard Lutnick, Trump’s nominee for Commerce Secretary, said studies and calculations would be completed by April 1, after which Trump could act immediately. The tariffs will require detailed analysis for nearly 200 countries, each with its own complex tariff schedules and trade regulations — a big task for the U.S. Trade Representative and Commerce Department.

Key: The executive order says: “Within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall assess all fiscal impacts on the Federal Government and the impacts of any information collection requests on the public, and shall deliver an assessment in writing to the President.”

You can read the full White House Fact Sheet here .

Negotiation or Brinkmanship?

While the plan seems aggressive, Trump’s decision to delay immediate implementation could be a strategic move to encourage negotiations, as he successfully did with Mexico, Canada, and Colombia. He emphasized that he would be open to reducing tariffs if other nations lowered theirs or eliminated non-tariff barriers. “It’s a two-way street,” Lutnick said, suggesting the administration remains flexible if partners engage in reciprocal concessions.

However, Trump stated that exemptions and waivers would be rare. He referenced Apple Inc.’s past exemption during his China tariffs but insisted this round would apply to all companies and countries without exceptions.

Global Implications

The new tariff plan could particularly hurt developing nations that impose higher average duties on U.S. imports. It differs from Trump’s earlier campaign proposal for a universal tariff on all imports. Instead, reciprocal tariffs will be tailored to match specific foreign policies and trade barriers.

India could be one of the hardest-hit countries, with its historically high tariffs on U.S. goods. Trump’s announcement came just hours before a scheduled meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, signaling that the topic would feature prominently in their discussions.

Trump’s tariff push follows his earlier move to impose a 10% tariff on Chinese goods and plans for 25% tariffs on U.S. steel and aluminum imports next month. The breadth of the new directive suggests a significant expansion of his trade war strategy, which has already injected uncertainty into global markets and left businesses waiting for clarity.

Of note:
While Trump and his advisers blame U.S. trade deficits on unfair foreign practices, many economists argue these imbalances are largely driven by broader macroeconomic factors, such as consumer demand, the U.S. dollar’s status as a reserve currency, and global appetite for U.S. assets.

Farm Groups and Farm-State Lawmaker Reactions: Growing Alarm Over Reciprocal Tariffs

Trump’s proposal for reciprocal tariffs will likely spark reactions from some U.S. farm groups and lawmakers representing agricultural states, many of whom fear negative impacts on rural economies and American farmers.

Key Concerns from the Agriculture Sector

Loss of Export Markets: Many farmers fear that countries like Japan, South Korea, Mexico, and the EU will retaliate by targeting U.S. corn, soybeans, pork, dairy, and beef exports.
Financial Pressure on Farmers: After years of trade uncertainty and declining commodity prices, new tariffs could push many farms to the brink of bankruptcy.
Global Competitiveness: Other countries, such as Brazil and Argentina, could quickly fill the void in markets like China, permanently reducing U.S. market share.
Rural Economic Decline: Tariffs on farm goods have a ripple effect, hurting local businesses, equipment manufacturers, and rural banks that rely on the agriculture economy.

What Farm Groups May Demand

Exemptions for Agricultural Exports: Some farm groups are urging the White House to exempt agricultural products from reciprocal tariffs to avoid retaliation.
Prioritize Trade Agreements: Several organizations called for the administration to focus on new trade deals rather than escalating tariff battles.
Direct Financial Support: If tariffs are imposed, farm groups will push for expanded federal relief programs like those used during the U.S./China trade war.

Global and Economic Reactions to Trump’s Reciprocal Tariff Plan

President Trump’s proposal to impose reciprocal tariffs has triggered mixed reactions from global leaders, economists, and business groups, with many warning of significant economic repercussions and potential retaliation from U.S. trading partners.

International Response: Concern and Potential Retaliation

European Union (EU): EU officials expressed concerns about escalating trade tensions and hinted at preparing countermeasures. The EU is particularly sensitive to Trump’s criticism of its value-added tax (VAT) system and regulatory barriers.
Japan and South Korea: Both countries are seen as key targets of the new tariffs. Japanese trade officials stated that they were monitoring the situation closely and emphasized the importance of open markets. South Korea warned that reciprocal tariffs could disrupt supply chains, particularly in the technology and automotive sectors.
India: With historically high tariffs on U.S. goods, India is one of the most affected nations. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to address the issue in upcoming talks with Trump. Analysts predict India could seek bilateral negotiations to avoid harsh tariff penalties.
China: Though not directly addressed in this announcement, China could view the move as part of Trump’s broader trade war strategy, increasing tensions even further. Chinese officials reiterated their stance on global trade stability and multilateral solutions.

Economic Experts: Risks of Economic Disruption

Most economists criticized the plan, arguing that trade deficits reflect structural economic factors, such as consumer spending patterns and currency valuation, rather than unfair trade practices alone.

Bloomberg Economics predicted significant disruptions in emerging markets, where tariffs on U.S. goods are generally higher, and economies are more vulnerable.
Trade Uncertainty: Businesses fear an unpredictable environment. Companies dependent on global supply chains—especially in the automotive, semiconductor, and pharmaceutical industries—are bracing for increased costs and operational complexity.
Potential Consumer Impact: Higher tariffs could lead to increased prices for U.S. consumers, particularly on imported goods like cars and electronics, experts warned.

Business Community Reaction: Cautious but Wary

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Called for careful negotiation to avoid a full-blown trade war. “Reciprocal tariffs may help level the playing field,” a spokesperson said, “but they should be used as a last resort.”
Tech Industry: Companies like Apple are watching closely, given the potential impact on semiconductors and electronics imports. While Trump had previously granted Apple exemptions, this round may be far more restrictive.
Automotive Sector: Industry leaders warned that tariffs on car imports could reduce competitiveness and lead to job losses in U.S.-based manufacturing plants dependent on imported components.

Global Markets on Edge

The announcement injected volatility into global financial markets, with stocks in industries such as automotive, technology, and pharmaceuticals facing pressure. Investors remain uncertain about how aggressively the U.S. will enforce these tariffs and whether it could trigger retaliatory measures that harm global growth.

Expanded Global Country Responses and Market Impact

President Donald Trump’s plan for reciprocal tariffs has drawn sharp reactions across the globe, leaving governments scrambling to assess the potential consequences. The global financial markets have also reacted with volatility, particularly in industries most likely to be affected by the proposed changes.

Country-Specific Reactions

European Union (EU): Preparing for Retaliation
The EU sees Trump’s tariff strategy as a direct threat to its trade practices.

Targeted Sectors: Trump has repeatedly cited the 15% VAT and restrictions on U.S. agricultural exports as examples of unfair barriers.
Possible Retaliation: The EU is considering countermeasures, likely targeting U.S. agricultural products, Boeing aircraft, and tech companies.
Official Response: EU Trade Commissioner said, “We urge the U.S. to avoid actions that disrupt the global trade system. If necessary, the EU will defend its interests.”

Japan: Concern Over Automotive and Tech Exports

Japan is alarmed by the possibility of tariffs on automobiles and semiconductors, two of its most critical exports.

Automotive Sector: Tariffs on Japanese cars could significantly impact the country’s economy, where automobiles account for nearly 20% of total exports to the U.S.
Tech and Electronics: Semiconductor and electronics companies like Sony and Toshiba are bracing for higher costs and potential supply chain disruptions.
Diplomatic Response: Japan’s Ministry of Trade warned that “the move could destabilize longstanding trade ties” and emphasized the importance of resolving disputes through multilateral frameworks like the WTO.

South Korea: High-Tech Industries at Risk
South Korea’s tech and pharmaceutical sectors are directly in the line of fire.

Samsung Electronics, one of the world’s largest semiconductor manufacturers, stands to be heavily affected if Trump’s tariffs cover microchips.
Auto Industry: Hyundai and Kia have expressed concerns over potential tariffs on vehicle imports, which would raise prices for U.S. consumers and reduce their competitiveness.
Government Stance: The South Korean government indicated it would seek bilateral negotiations and warned that tariffs could lead to mutual economic harm.

India: High Tariff Barriers in Focus
India could be one of the hardest-hit countries due to its high tariffs on U.S. imports, especially in agriculture, medical devices, and tech products.

Key Sectors: U.S./India trade tensions are likely to rise, particularly in the pharmaceutical and automobile sectors, where India has long imposed protective tariffs.
Modi-Trump Talks: Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to use upcoming talks to negotiate exemptions or reductions in targeted areas.
Domestic Impact: Analysts warn that higher tariffs could reduce India’s access to critical U.S. technology and agricultural products, affecting domestic businesses and consumers.

China: Watching Closely
Although China was not a primary target of this announcement, it remains cautious, given Trump’s history of escalating trade disputes.

Strategic Watch: Chinese officials see Trump’s move as part of a broader trade containment strategy.
Potential Retaliation: If included in future tariff rounds, China could respond by targeting U.S. agricultural products, energy exports, and tech firms.

Market Impact: Volatility and Sectoral Effects

Trump’s announcement has caused uncertainty in global financial markets, with some sectors feeling immediate pressure.

Stock Market Reactions

Automotive Stocks: Companies like Toyota, Hyundai, and BMW saw share prices dip on fears of higher tariffs and reduced competitiveness in the U.S.
Tech Sector: Semiconductor giants such as Samsung and Intel are facing concerns about increased costs if tariffs extend to microchips and related technologies.
Pharmaceuticals: Multinational drug manufacturers, including Pfizer and Novartis, are bracing for disruptions in global supply chains and higher costs.

Currency Market Volatility

The announcement triggered fluctuations in Asian and European currencies as investors assessed the risk of a full-scale trade war.
The U.S. dollar initially strengthened on expectations that tariffs might reduce the trade deficit, but analysts warn this could be temporary if retaliatory measures weaken U.S. exports.

Commodity Market Impact

Agricultural Commodities: Potential retaliatory tariffs from trading partners could hit U.S. farmers, particularly those exporting soybeans, corn, and dairy products.
Steel and Aluminum: Following earlier tariffs on these products, prices for industrial metals may rise further, increasing production costs in manufacturing-heavy industries.

Broader Economic Consequences

Economists caution that the uncertainty alone could slow global growth by reducing business investment and cross-border trade.

Supply Chain Disruptions: Many industries rely on global supply chains, and new tariffs could force companies to restructure operations at significant cost.
Consumer Prices: U.S. consumers may face higher prices on imported goods, particularly in sectors like electronics, automobiles, and household goods.

Long-Term Risks

Global Trade Fragmentation: If other countries adopt similar protectionist measures, it could lead to the fragmentation of the global trading system, reversing decades of economic integration.
Shift in Trade Alliances: Countries excluded from U.S. tariff targeting may seek regional trade alliances to reduce their dependence on U.S. markets.

Tariffs Aren't Going To Be Our Largest Trade Issue

Wed, 08 Jan 2025 20:54:19 GMT

The most overused word in the English language since November has to be the word “tariff” as speculation runs rampant on how much a Trump 2.0 presidency will use this controversial trade negotiation tool.

Here’s a sampling, so you get the idea: “Think About Making These Purchases Before the Trump Tariffs are Enacted”, U.S. News; “U.S. Carmakers Face Rough Ride Under Trump Tariffs”, Bloomberg.com; and “Bourbon Industry Concerned About Looming Tariffs”, LEX18. You know it’s bad when tariffs threaten to make it harder to drink your troubles away!

Tariffs can disrupt almost any industry, but U.S. agriculture has already seen this movie.

During Trump’s first term, according to the USDA’s Economic Research Service, retaliatory tariffs reduced U.S. agricultural exports by $27 billion from mid-2018 when the tariffs were imposed to the end of 2019. Soybeans accounted for the majority of the decline at 71%, followed by sorghum and pork at 7% and 5%, respectively. The losses were primarily concentrated in states, such as Iowa, Illinois and Kansas, exporting these products.

As a result of ag being caught in the cross fire of a new trade war, the USDA allocated $23 billion in trade-aid payments to U.S. producers. However, the rest of the story is that the Trump administration’s tough-line trade tactics ultimately led to the China Phase I deal and record exports to China and record farm income in 2021 and 2022.

That turned out to be short-lived. Even with the Phase I deal still in place, 2024 saw a serious erosion of U.S. agricultural exports to the Chinese mainland. After reaching a high of $36.38 billion in goods in 2022, USDA ERS projected 2024’s final export tally to China was expected to come in at only $23.3 billion.

So What Exactly Went Wrong This Time Around?
One could still blame such an export freefall on some of the tariffs that are still in place. But the truth is that the U.S. is now navigating the most troubled geopolitical waters since the Cold War days of JFK and Ronald Reagan. Simply put, China and Russia—aka the old Soviet Union—are not our friends.

What should be concerning, to those in U.S. agriculture and beyond, is the influence these two countries now have over a multi-country trading alliance referred to as BRICS. That acronym is short for the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa alliance.

The original members of BRICS held their first summit in Russia in 2009 and sought to establish themselves as a geopolitical club to counter the influence of the G7 nations: the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy and Japan. Their agenda at that first meeting was firmly shaped by the global recession and, therefore, mostly focused on redistributing voting rights in the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in favor of the developing world. One of the most controversial statements to come out of that 2009 meeting was the calling for a new global reserve currency. From that point on, it was clear that the dominance of the U.S. dollar was being put on notice by the members of BRICS.

Today, the trading bloc is the world’s largest by population and accounts for about 37% of the world’s grain. China has been particularly aggressive in strategic moves with countries within BRICS. In 2023, Brazil was China’s largest source of agricultural imports. This movement of agricultural products accounted for more than 50% of Brazil’s total trade with China and 24.85% of China’s overall agricultural imports. No longer are U.S. farmers China’s primary source of imported soybeans or corn.

Real-Life Monopoly
Right now, China is buying up railroads in Brazil plus upgrading and expanding port facilities. Between 2007 and 2022, China invested $71.6 billion in 235 projects carried out in Brazil. The country’s investment and buying spree have been more impressive within the continent of Africa. At present, 53 out of 54 nations in Africa are part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which supports building key infrastructure projects throughout Africa, Asia and Europe. The projects intend to provide improved shipping corridors for precious raw materials and commodities. As of 2023, the two-way investment between China and its BRI partners had reached $380 billion.

If U.S. agricultural exports to China continue their decline, then it won’t be because of the “T” word. It will be because China holds a majority of railroads, utilities and low-cost properties on the world’s Monopoly board. Why buy U.S. soybeans when you can ship them from Brazil on your own railroad to your own port to your own container ship? Same goes for precious metals in Africa or oil in Russia or Iran. If you already own everything but Boardwalk and Park Place, then you don’t need the economies of the West to be involved as you plot your future livelihood.

Time To Take Control
A lot of unknowns exist as the second iteration of the Trump presidency begins. But this is clear. In 2023, the U.S. trade deficit with China was a whopping $279.4 billion. Those are the very dollars subsidizing a railroad somewhere in Brazil or a superhighway in South Africa—all to our own detriment. For the sake of our own future, we must start negotiating trade deals from a position of strength instead of begging for mercy. “Speak softly, and carry a big stick” was Teddy Roosevelt’s mantra during his time as president. When it comes to U.S. agricultural trade, we need Trump to start channeling his inner Teddy beginning Jan. 20, 2025.

Recognizing the Triumph of Science in Space and Agriculture

Sun, 27 Aug 2023 13:00:00 GMT

By V. Ravichandran: Poongulam Village, Tamil Nadu, India

India’s successful lunar landing this week is a proud moment for our country and a pivotal, positive moment for our farmers.

It offers important proof how far India has come and points to what we may yet attain—both in the heavens above and here on earth.

I remember the Apollo 11 moon landing in 1969. How can anyone forget such a great moment? Neil Armstrong’s quote still reverberates in my mind: “One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.”

Many people around the world watched the event on their televisions, but not me. Those days, there were no televisions in India. We were listening to the status of the Apollo 11 space mission through radio news.

The launch of Chandrayaan-3 last month, by contrast, was televised throughout our country on all the channels as well as streamed on the internet. Millions of people are in awe of the technology behind the spacecraft and full of patriotic pride about India’s accomplishment.

We’ve launched satellites for years, of course. A generation ago, the Indian Space Research Organization put up the IRS-1C, the world’s most advanced remote sensing satellite with a panchromatic camera (PAN) that sends back pictures of the earth. These imaging capabilities help predict the weather pattern, get precise guidance on where it would rain, provide instant communication and entertainment and make available a wide range of knowledge. Farmers use its data on soil profiles, likelihood of pest and disease, groundwater availability, and more.

India is now just the fourth country to place a spacecraft on the surface of the moon, along with the United States, Russia, and China—and we did it on the moon’s south pole, which no other country has managed.

Putting a vehicle on the moon is hard. An Indian lander crashed four years ago. Just last weekend, a Russian effort failed.

“Whatever the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve,” said Napoleon Hill .

His words are as true for spacefaring as they are for farming.

When Armstrong stepped onto another world, nobody could conceive or believe that one day India would follow him there with its own technology. We were in the middle of perhaps the greatest food-security challenge in human history, trying to feed our hungry people.

As Americans made for the moon in the 1960s, India embarked on its own moonshot—a different giant leap forward for mankind.

It took a massive effort of science and technology to tackle an enormous problem, which is that India and many other developing countries failed to grow enough food. At that time, India was not able to produce enough food to feed our own population, supplying only about half of its nutritional need We had to import the rest.

We also knew that we could do much better.

We still import a lot of food, especially pulses and cooking oil. Yet now we’re full participants in a vigorous system of international trade, exporting more agricultural goods than we import, with rice, sugar, wheat, spices, and meat leading the way. Last year, the value of our exports topped $50 billion, the highest in history.

Getting here was a triumph of science and technology, in what today we call the Green Revolution .

Led by Norman Borlaug of the United States as well as India’s own M.S. Swaminathan and C. Subramaniam , the Green Revolution connected farmers to innovators. Together, they transformed agriculture with new high-yield varieties of rice and wheat and modern mechanization, irrigation, and storage. Better access to fertilizer and outstanding crop-protection products also were essential.

It was a global effort, improving food security everywhere, but its most significant feats were in India. Dr. Borlaug won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, the year after the Apollo 11 mission. In 1987, during the era of the space shuttles, Dr. Swaminathan received the first World Food Prize .

Earlier this year, India became the world’s most populous nation , with more people than China. Partly because of this, we continue to face food challenges. Millions of my fellow citizens fail to receive proper nutrition.

What we need is a Green Revolution for the 21st century—a Gene Revolution that harnesses the power of biotechnology to grow the best crops in the world.

This revolution is well underway, and its elements include everything from GMOs we plant in the ground to precision agriculture that is powered by GPS satellites in space.

Unfortunately, India’s political leaders have resisted many aspects of this new revolution, especially with the gene technologies that continue to improve seeds, making them at once more robust and better able to resist pests, weeds, disease, drought, and more.

Perhaps the success of Chandrayaan-3 will inspire a reconsideration. Without the Green Revolution in the earliest days of the space age, my country wouldn’t have a space program today. You can’t think well, sleep well, or progress well if you don’t dine well.

If India returns to our legacy of agricultural achievement, imagine what we will do in the future, on earth and among the stars.

Mr. V Ravichandran owns a 60-acre farm at Poongulam Village in Tamil Nadu, India where he grows rice, sugar cane, cotton and pulses (small grains). Mr. Ravichandran is a member of the Global Farmer Network, 2013 recipient of the Kleckner Award and served on the World Economic Forum New Vision for Agriculture Transformational Leaders Network. www.globalfarmernetwork.org