Describe India’s objections to agricultural negotiations at the World Trade Organisation.

India argues that the Agreement on Agriculture of 1995 locked in the subsidy advantages developed countries already held, while constraining the instruments developing countries still need.

• A reference price frozen in the past. Domestic support is measured against an external reference price fixed at 1986-88 levels with no inflation adjustment, so support stable in real terms appears to breach limits simply because prices have since risen.
• Asymmetric entitlements. The de minimis allowance is 10 per cent of production value for developing countries and 5 per cent for developed ones, but the latter also hold large historical Aggregate Measurement of Support entitlements India never had.
• The Green Box loophole. Support classified as minimally trade-distorting is unlimited, and developed countries simply reclassified their support into it as direct payments.
• Public stockholding. Procurement at minimum support prices for the public distribution system is counted as trade-distorting. The Bali decision of 2013 gave an interim peace clause; the permanent solution India seeks is still not agreed.
• No Special Safeguard Mechanism against import surges and price collapses.

With the G-33 and the Africa Group, India demands a permanent solution on stockholding, an operational safeguard mechanism, correction of the reference period and disciplines on the Green Box — on the principle that food security cannot be treated as ordinary trade distortion.