भारतीय लोकतंत्र के साठ साल का लेखा-जोखा

अचिन वनायक
प्रोफेसर, जवाहरलाल नेहरू विश्वविद्यालय'
लोकतांत्रिक मूल्यों के साथ-साथ तमाम मुश्किलें ही भारत को असाधारण लोकतंत्र बनाती हैं' भारत में स्वतंत्रता के बाद 60 साल में राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर लोकतंत्र ख़ासा मज़बूत हुआ है, लेकिन गाँव-तहसील स्तर पर अलोकतांत्रिक व्यवहार और हिंसा भी नज़र आती है।भारत एक बहुत ही असाधारण लोकतंत्र है जिसकी कुछ बहुत ही मज़बूत लोकतांत्रिक विशेषताएँ हैं और कुछ बहुत ही अलोकतांत्रिक विशेषताएँ भी हैं। भारतीयों ने लोकतांत्रित व्यवस्था में रहना पसंद किया है. उपलब्धियाँउपलब्धियों की बात करें तो यही लोकतांत्रित ढाँचा है जिसने ‘सेफ़्टी वॉल्व’ का काम किया है और कभी-कभी असल मुद्दे भी सलुझाए हैं. नहीं तो भारत जैसा बड़ा और इतनी असमानताओं वाला देश भला अविभाजित कैसे रह सकता था?भारत में लोकतांत्रिक परंपरा दूर-दूर तक फैल रही है और उसकी जड़ें और गहरी हो रही हैं. देखा गया है कि चुनावों में संपन्न वर्ग के मुकाबले, आर्थिक और सामाजिक दृष्टि से पिछड़े वर्ग ज़्यादा बढ़-चढ़कर भाग लेते हैं. मुख्य पड़ाव पिछले 15 साल में– 1990 के दशक से लेकर अब तक लोकतांत्रिक व्यवस्था में अनिश्चितता बढ़ गई है. यदि लोकतांत्रिक राजनीति के मुख्य पड़ावों की बात करे तो इमरजेंसी और फिर उसका दोहराया न जाना, मंडल आयोग की सिफ़ारिशें लागू करना, बाबरी मस्जिद विध्वंस, 1998 के पोखरण परमाणु बम धमाके और गुजरात में मुसलमानों के ख़िलाफ़ दंगे प्रमुख हैं दूसरी ओर विकसित देशों में उपेक्षित वर्ग मतदान में ज़्यादा संख्या में भाग नहीं लेता क्योंकि उसे चुनाव में भाग लेने का कोई ख़ास मक़सद नज़र नहीं आता. अब सवाल उठता है कि क्या अपनी स्थिति सुधारने के लिए सामाजिक या आर्थिक रूप से पिछड़ गए वर्ग की लोकतांत्रिक व्यवस्था में पूरी आस्था है?ये आस्था का सवाल कम है और असल बात ये है कि वे इस व्यवस्था को ज़रूरी मानते हैं लेकिन काफ़ी नहीं. उन्हें लगता है कि इससे उनकी मदद होती है और इसका इस्तेमाल करना चाहिए, फिर चाहे ये पर्याप्त न हो. आज़ादी के बाद के 20-25 साल में मज़दूरों और किसानों के संघर्ष, यानी आर्थिक मुद्दो पर आंदोलन ज़रुर हुए थे. लेकिन इसके बाद सांस्कृतिक मुद्दों पर असंतोष, आर्थिक असंतोष से ज़्यादा देखा गया है. विभिन्न क्षेत्रों में आर्थिक विकास के लिहाज़ से फ़र्क तो रहा है लेकिन जनांदोलन सामाजिक-सांस्कृतिक मुद्दों पर रहे हैं. इसका ये मतलब नहीं है कि आर्थिक असंतोष रहा ही नहीं, लेकिन अब आर्थिक मुद्दों पर लोगों को एकजुट करना ख़ासा मुश्किल हो गया है.अहम पड़ावपिछड़ों को आरक्षण देकर उनके अधिकार दिलाने का प्रयास लोकतंत्र का एक अहम पड़ाव रहा भारतीय लोकतंत्र की असफलताओं की बात करें तो पिछले 15 साल में– 1990 के दशक से लेकर अब तक लोकतांत्रिक व्यवस्था में अनिश्चितता बढ़ गई है. यदि लोकतांत्रिक राजनीति के पाँच मुख्य पड़ावों की बात करें तो पहला, आपातकाल का लागू किया जाना और उतना ही महत्वपूर्ण, फिर उसका दोहराया न जाना था. दूसरा था मंडल आयोग की सिफ़ारिशों को लागू करना यानी पिछड़ों को और अधिकार दिलाने का प्रयास. आज़ाद भारत के लोकतांत्रिक सफ़र का तीसरा मुख्य पड़ाव था बाबरी मस्जिद विध्वंस और चौथा था वर्ष 1998 के पोखरण धमाके जिनसे राष्ट्रपिता महात्मा गांधी को बहुत सदमा पहुँचता. पाँचवाँ मुख्य पड़ाव है वर्ष 2002 में गुजरात में गोधरा की घटना और अल्पसंख्यक मुस्लिम समुदाय के सदस्यों की हत्याएँ, जिसके लिए ज़िम्मेदार अधिकतर लोगों को केवल क़ानूनी तौर पर ही नहीं बल्कि राजनीतिक तौर पर भी सज़ा नहीं मिली.ये सब मुख्य पड़ाव है और इनमें हिंसा का पहलू भी रहा है. शायद मंडल आयोग सिफ़ारिशों को छोड़कर बाक़ी घटनाएँ लोकतंत्र के लिए नकारात्मक हैं. ये सब घटनाएँ इस बात का भी संकेत हैं कि भारत के उच्च वर्ग का किरदार किस तरह बदल रहा है. भारतीय लोकतंत्र असल में ‘आप पर कौन शासन करेगा,’ इसकी प्रतिस्पर्धा है. ये उस लिहाज़ से लोगों के सशक्तिकरण की प्रक्रिया कम है. लेकिन राज्यों के स्तर पर लोगों के पास काफ़ी विकल्प हैं जो एक सकारात्मक बात है. संसद में 28 अलग-अलग राजनीतिक दल हैं और पार्टियों की नीतियों में फ़र्क देंखे तो वह भी ख़ासा है. अमरीका या ब्रिटेन में तो लोगों के पास विकल्प सीमित हैं.सक्रिय ताकतेंआज के भारतीय लोकतंत्र और भविष्य के भारत की रचना में कौन सी ताक़तों की मुख्य भूमिका है? इस संदर्भ में सबसे पहली ताक़त है अनिश्चित और धीमी गति से लेकिन लगातार बढ़ रहा हिंदुत्व जिसका प्रभाव केवल चुनावों में ही नहीं, बल्कि समाजिक रिश्तों पर भी दिख रहा है. दूसरी बड़ी ताक़त है पिछड़े वर्ग का अपने अधिकारों के लिए दबाव बनाना. तीसरी ताक़त है दलितों का अपने अधिकारों और सत्ता में भागीदारी के लिए सक्रिय होना. चौथा प्रभाव है मुसलमानों का पारंपरिक नेतृत्व के साथ असंतुष्ट होना, महिलाओं के अधिकार और समुदाय के सदस्यों को शिक्षित करने और रोज़गार दिलाने का प्रश्न. इसके साथ ही यह समुदाय इस अहम सवाल का सामना कर रहा है कि ‘हम (मुसलमान) कहाँ जा रहे हैं?’ अन्य मुख्य पहलू हैं भारतीय राजनीतिक का क्षेत्रीयकरण और भारत के तथाकथित मध्य वर्ग का आगे बढ़ना– तथाकथित इसलिए क्योंकि ये मध्य वर्ग देश का लगभग 15-20 प्रतिशत उच्च और प्रभावशाली वर्ग है. इन प्रभावों का मिश्रण और एक-दूसरे पर हावी होना वह पेचीदा तस्वीर पैदा करता है जिससे वर्तमान और भविष्य के भारत की रचना होगी.क्षेत्रीय राजनीतिक दल आगे बढ़े हैं और राष्ट्रीय दलों को हाथ मिलाने के लिए मजबूर किया है मज़बूत जड़ें क्योंभारत में लोकतंत्र की जड़ें पड़ोसी देशों के मुक़ाबले में मज़बूत क्यों हैं? इसका कोई एक मुख्य कारण नहीं है, इसके कई कारण हैं. आज़ादी के बाद के 20-25 साल में राष्ट्रीय राजनीति पर कांग्रेस का प्रभुत्व रहा. कई मायने में कांग्रेस आज़ादी से पहले ही इस ‘रोल’ के लिए तैयार थी और प्रशासकीय भूमिका निभा रही थी. ये चाहे सतही तौर पर उस समय की भारतीय राजनीति का अलोकतांत्रिक पहलू प्रतीत हो, लेकिन उस समय कांग्रेस में कई धड़े थे जो अलग-अलग विचारधाराओं का प्रतिनिधित्व करते थे. जब कांग्रेस का प्रभुत्व ख़त्म हुआ तो पहले ये राज्यों में हुआ. वहाँ आपस में मुक़ाबला करती काफ़ी हद तक स्थिर, दो-पार्टी या तीन-पार्टियों की व्यवस्था कायम हुई. इसके बाद ही राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर कई पार्टियाँ सामने आईं. राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर दो ऐसी घटनाएँ हुईं जिन्होंने भारत की एकता को बल दिया- भाषा के आधार पर राज्यों का पुनर्गठन और राष्ट्रीय चुनावों को प्रांतीय चुनावों से अलग करना.भाषा के आधार पर राज्यों के बनने से शायद उर्दू को छोड़कर बाक़ी सभी भाषाओं का विकास हुआ और राज्यों में लोगों की पहचान मज़बूत हुई. अगर भाषा के आधार पर राज्य न बनते तो काफ़ी मुश्किलें हो सकती थीं. इसके अलावा, राष्ट्रीय चुनावों को राज्यों के चुनावों से अलग कर दिए जाने से क्षेत्रीय पार्टियों को बल मिला और राज्यों के लोगों को अपने मुद्दे उठाना और उनकी ओर ध्यान आकर्षित करना आसान हो गया. इससे आज़ाद भारत में लोकतंत्र मज़बूत हुआ.

(बीबीसी संवाददाता अतुल संगर के साथ बातचीत के आधार पर)

When Farmer's Die

When Farmer's Die

(Almost every sector failed the Andhra Pradesh farmer - the Government, the political class, intellectuals, planners, human rights groups, a once-activist judiciary and the media, says P Sainath. June 2004: )

Andhra Pradesh is in the midst of an agrarian Emergency. The tragic farmers' suicides are, finally, an extreme symptom of a much deeper rural distress. The result of a decade-long onslaught on the livelihoods of millions. The crisis now goes way beyond the families ravaged by the suicides. And beyond the farming community itself. There is an urgent need to end the suicides. But doing so without addressing the larger distress is to try and mop the floor dry with the taps open.
Over 300 farmers have taken their lives these past six weeks. And thousands since the structured assault on agriculture in Andhra Pradesh began years ago. For every farmer who has committed suicide, countless others face morale-sapping despair. Large numbers of people are also in a zone marked by growing hunger and a fragile equilibrium. There have been hunger deaths, too, this year. One more bad season could push many over the edge.
Much as sections of the media would like to believe, this is not a new development. Nor something that can be pinned on a month-old Government. The suicides have been occurring for over seven years now. And in some periods, with even greater intensity. So too has hunger been growing. Even last year, this publication reported that crisis in the state. (A gruel-ing season) And the callous indifference of the Chandrababu Naidu Government to what was going on. (Hi-tech, Low Nutrition). This year, the chickens have come home to roost.
A survey this month, covering scores of rural households across many districts, strengthens that picture. These include dozens of families whose breadwinners have committed suicide. The issues are complex and the linkages many. And cannot be reduced to that old favourite: drought. Sure that's a big problem. But one amongst others. Farmers are taking their lives in better-irrigated regions too.
The rural landscape is a shambles. Agricultural credit and finance systems have collapsed. Taking their place are new entities that can make the village moneylender seem relatively less coercive. Prices have pushed most inputs beyond the reach of the small farmer. For many, the move from food crops to cash crops proved fatal. In some cases, the shift was towards high-outlay, water-guzzling crops such as sugar cane. All this, in an era of huge power tariff hikes. A steady shrinking of local democracy further deepened the chaos.
Add to this, big drops in purchasing power. And the worst performance in rural employment seen in years. Both landed farmers and agricultural workers have taken a terrible beating. The people of Andhra Pradesh are paying the price for a 'Vision' that sought to displace 40 per cent of those in agriculture from that sector. Without a clue as to where to take them next.
All the households surveyed had incredible levels of debt. Many had failed to gain the credit needed at the start of this season (one reason driving the latest suicides). All have seen crop failure for two or more years. Almost every one of them had made distress sales of land or cattle or both in the past few years. Just 20 of them combined had health expenditure running into a few lakhs of rupees. Most had changed crops in recent years. All of them had spent unbelievable sums in their search for water. Mainly sinking borrowed money in borewells. All were selling their produce to creditors of some sort at well below market price.
This is the canvas that Prof. K. Nagaraj of the Madras Institute of Development Studies calls "a predatory commercialisation of the countryside." The farmers have been its prey.
The new awareness of the media is welcome, if ironic. Journals that never once said a word on the suicides when they were most intense now do body counts. Maybe the media are trying to make up for their silence but cannot admit it. The suicides, though, have been going on for years. Some journalists in the Telugu press did a magnificent job of keeping the issue alive. It was the 'national' media that treated it with scorn, even disbelief.
To lay the deaths at the door of the new Government, as some have sought to do, is to ignore the fundamental evidence: That the victims gave up after years of trying to cope with a situation made impossible by others beyond their control. After seven or more years of being crushed, defeated and ruined. People did not wake up one morning and say: "Hey, the government has changed. I think I'll take my life today." Theirs was a heart-breaking, ultimate protest against a society that showed no concern for them. It would be right to haul up the new Government if it fails to give the state a fundamental directional change. But the latest suicides have roots that lie in years of past failure. About the most cruel thing being said, though, is that people are taking their lives to `gain' from the compensation. What a contradiction in terms. Lose your life and gain from it.
Suppose for one moment this crazy thought is true. That people are taking their lives because a government has announced compensation for their families. What does it say of the society that we've built this past decade? That a farmer would rather take his or her life and get Rs. 1 lakh for the children rather than go on living amongst us? It speaks far less about them, far more about us. It also ignores the fact that there were a huge number of suicides in 2000-01 when the 'compensation' had long been stopped.
This notion measures not the 'gain' of the farmers but the loss of our own humanity. The profound indifference to the suffering of others that the 'me-first decade' has legitimised. The idea that a mother and father both end their lives leaving behind aged parents and tiny infants to 'gain' is a heartless one. Or, as in one case, a father and son commit suicide within a year of each other. To make money out of it?
Why has this happened more in Andhra Pradesh than anywhere else? After all, the basic economic model we see here did and does exist across the country.
For one thing, Andhra Pradesh under Mr. Naidu was far more aggressive than any other state in pushing that model. With the national - and global - elite backing him, he acted without compunction. Most of the support systems the poor in the state had (some put in place by N.T. Rama Rao) were ruthlessly dismantled. Also, no other state and leader were so totally exempt from critical scrutiny. The media didn't just hail the Emperor's New Clothes. It was so busy weaving them, it failed to see Andhra Pradesh's fabric being torn apart. The Emperor could do no wrong. So why look? The farmers' suicides never made the cover of a national magazine in the years they were most intense.
For another, the decline of democracy in the state. The 'Janmabhoomi' model of development sidelined the panchayats, robbed them of resources and demoralised local democracy. This meant a collapse of collective action at the village level. The panchayats have played little or no role in dealing with the crisis. The dying of local democracy had a clear corollary. Extreme external interference. Andhra Pradesh was not run by or for its people, or on their wishes. It was run on the blueprints of McKinsey, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the DFID and others of that fraternity. By thousands of expensive 'consultants.' All, unelected and extra-constitutional centres of power.
There have been farmers' suicides in other states too. Karnataka saw a large number last year. They have also occurred in Maharashtra, Punjab and Rajasthan. Even Kerala. Maybe with a change in media attitudes now, we could learn more about what's happening elsewhere.
The new Government has at least acknowledged that the deaths continue. You can dispute its numbers but it has not tried to deny the suicides. Its short-term measures include several that are a must. Like help for the affected families. And the proposed six-month moratorium on debt. But the problem won't end there. Even in the short term, there's an urgent need for food-for-work programmes. And the Government must use the six-month period to work out more lasting moves on debt relief. It has to plan on raising incomes and purchasing power amongst the poor. On restoring support systems. On building rural employment as never before.
The new Government at the Centre must surely also have a sense of how deep voter anger ran in this election. But does it know just how intense the crisis is? Seems doubtful. Parliament met on June 2. The first day of the new session, eight farmers took their lives in Andhra Pradesh. By the time the session ended on June 10, 69 had died the same way. It was a new Lok Sabha meeting after a historic election. Yet the Finance Minister was absent from the House on the very first day. He was busy drying the tears of the distraught millionaires of Dalal Street. Not the happiest signal of this Government's priorities.
Almost every sector of Indian democracy failed the Andhra Pradesh farmer; the Government and the political class; the tame intellectuals and planners. The human rights groups and a once-activist judiciary. And a media that failed in their simplest, yet vital duty in a democracy: to signal the weaknesses in society. (Courtesy: The Hindu) ⊕
P Sainath June 2004
P Sainath is one of the two recipients of the A.H. Boerma Award, 2001, granted for his contributions in changing the nature of the development debate on food, hunger and rural development in the Indian media. He is the Rural Affairs Editor at The Hindu.
URL for this article:http://www.indiatogether.org/2004/jun/psa-farmdie.htm

AT THE MERCY OF GLOBALISATION

All elements of India's food security policy are today being dismantled. Starvation is the inevitable result of policies promoting a sudden withdrawal of the role of the State and reckless dependence on markets to bring food to the poor, writes VANDANA SHIVA.
IN 1942, more than three million people died in Bengal and Orissa due to starvation. Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen showed that it was not a lack of food but a lack of food entitlements and food rights which caused starvation deaths. And he also showed that famine did not occur in post-colonial India because people's rights were protected. The Constitution guarantees the right to life, and the right to food is at the heart of the right to life. The State has a related duty to ensure that no one goes hungry. Food for work programmes, the Public Distribution System (PDS), price regulation and anti-hoarding measures have been diverse policy components of ensuring that people's food entitlements are protected.
All elements of India's food security policy are today being dismantled under pressure from the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Starvation is the inevitable result of policies promoting a sudden withdrawal of the role of the State and reckless dependence on markets to bring food to the poor.
In 1995, in preparation for the World Food summit, civil society in India had drafted a People's Charter for Food Security in which we had anticipated today's starvation deaths and suicides.
Trade liberalisation will result in the creation of a class of "redundant" humans, comprising mainly displaced landless rural agro-related communities, including artisans and fisherfolk, who will be doubly hit by the loss of their traditional markets and linkages with the agro-sector as well by loss of food entitlements. The food security of this new class of "dispensable" people with neither food entitlements nor purchasing power will be totally denied by an agri-business dominated agriculture.
It is now time for the second food summit, just before the WTO ministerial meeting in Doha in November. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) will meet in Washington this month end.
The Government in denial mode
Famine has returned to Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh. Between July 27 and August 28, twenty deaths were reported from Kashipur district, Orissa. Eleven children were reported dead in Udaipur, Rajasthan, over a week. Earlier, 800 of tribal children had died of starvation. On September 6, when the Chief Minister visited Kashipur, people pelted him with mango kernels, a starvation diet which they have been forced to depend on.
Both the Central and the State Governments are making a deliberate attempt at dismantling the people's food security system through trade liberalisation and globalisation policies.
These are, however, very direct and clear connections between the policies of "economic reform" and starvation deaths and suicides in rural India.
The Bengal famine in 1943 forced intervention by the Government to ensure the supply of food. A rationing system was introduced. The first Foodgrains Policy Committee, appointed in 1943, recommended procurement of foodgrains from surplus areas, rationing for equitable distribution and statutory price control for checking the price rise.
The foodgrains policy for independent India recommended abolition of controls and rationing and necessity of imports to maintain central reserves. Between 1957-58 and 1966-67, the PDS had become completely dominated by imports under PL 480.
In 1965, the Food Corporation of India (FCI) was set up to procure and import foodgrains and service the PDS system. The FCI was part of the Green Revolution package of centralised food production and distribution.
Two central bodies related to food production, procurement and distribution were established in 1965 on World Bank advice. One was the FCI. The other was the Agricultural Prices Commission (APC) which determined the minimum support prices for food grains, and through it, controlled cropping patterns, land use and profitability. Through food price and procurement, the Central Government now controlled the economics of foodgrain production and distribution. The profitability of foodgrain production in this centralised and enclavised form could not be maintained over time.
In 1991, the same agency, the World Bank, that had designed the centralised system called for its dismantling through its Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP) of the PDS system, the removal of the Essential Commodities Act, removal of price and inventory control and a total deregulation of agricultural trade.
The revamped PDS (RPDS) was supposed to better target vulnerable regions and reduce public expenditure. However, all it did was create more hunger while increasing Government expenditure. In 1997, the RPDS was replaced by the Targeted PDS (TPDS) which provided 10 kg of wheat or rice per month to families below the Poverty Line (BPL) at highly subsidised prices, and withdrawal of all subsidies from families above the poverty line (APL). As a result, food prices increased, off take decreased, and stocks grew.
There were major problems with the TPDS system. First, the BPL/APL categories were arbitrary and the BPL beneficiaries who were to be targeted were artificially reduced. The whole exercise of targeting the BPL families was exposed as a farce when 12 States informed the Supreme Court that they could not identify people in the BPL category. Instead of targeting the poor, the World Bank driven policies made the poor end their food entitlements.
The TPDS has artificially divided the population into those below the poverty line (BPL) and those above the poverty line (APL). It is common knowledge that those who access food from fair price shops are those who cannot buy it from the market. Those above the poverty line have been defined earning above Rs. 1,500 a month. Those in the APL category also have to bear 100 per cent of the procurement and distribution costs, which places the foodgrains far above their reach. In fact, the Government committee formulating the long-term grain policy has demanded that the price of grain for those APL be slashed by 25 per cent.
Further, the quantum of allotment of 10 kg per family at best meets only 12 per cent of the nutritional requirement, forcing the poor to depend on high markets for 88 per cent of their requirements and eat less, thus reducing off take from the PDS. Table 1 shows how the targeted PDS has reduced food allotments to the poor to below survival levels.
Growing starvation, growing stocks
The decline in off take is the main reason for increasing stocks. Fifty million tonnes of foodgrains are rotting while people cannot afford to buy food. Stocks of rice have increased from 13m tonnes to 22m tonnes, while wheat stocks have gone up from 872m tonnes to 2,411m tonnes.
Spending more to starve the poor
The main justification for allowing food prices to increase was reducing Government expenditure on food subsidies. However, while more people are eating less due to the removal of food subsidies and consequent increase in food prices, Government expenditure has actually increased.
Destruction of livelihood security
Since India is an agricultural society, food security for most people is ensured through livelihood security in agriculture. Agricultural livelihoods provide the entitlements that ensure access to food. Destruction of agricultural livelihoods lead to entitlement failure, and hence to food insecurity. It is little wonder that most areas, and most reports of starvation deaths come from the countryside. The famines of 1942 and 1877 were also reflections of food insecurity faced by peasants.
The new threats to the food security faced by the poor especially food producers come from four sources that erode food entitlements.
Increasing costs of inputs
The first is the shift from internal input sustainable farming systems to external purchased inputs like seeds, fertilizers, pesticides which drain farmers' incomes and lock peasants into debt. As the subsidies that made the Green Revolution have been withdrawn and the input sector has been deregulated, farmers expenditure on purchasing seeds and chemicals has increased, pushing peasants into debt and penury. The epidemic of farmers suicides is a reflection of this crisis of the rising costs of input.
Decline in food production
The second shift causing food security is the shift from staples to cash crops. From 1960-61 to 1998-99 the area under nutritious grains (called "coarse grains" because of the rice and wheat bias) has gone down from 45 million hectares to 29.5 million hectares, area under cotton has increased from 7.6 to 9.3m ha, and area under sugarcane has increased from 2.4 to 4.1m ha. Since the new economic policies were introduced in 1990-91, the area under foodgrains has declined by - 2 per cent, area under course grains has declined by - 18 per cent, area under non-food cash crops such as cotton and sugarcane have increased by 25 per cent and 10 per cent respectively. During 1999-2000 - 2000-2001, food production has gone down from 208.9 million tonnes to 196.1 million tonnes, a 12.8 per cent decline.
The third source of decline of rural incomes and entitlements is related to decline in farm prices with the withdrawal of Government procurement and non-implementation of the Minimum Support Price. Under the Green Revolution model of Public Distribution, the Central Government through the FCI procures food grains. The FCI is increasingly stepping out of its procurement functions. The withdrawal of Government from procurement and hence the withdrawal of the Minimum Support Price will push farm prices down further. In Punjab, farmers had to protest to force the Government to procure their grain. Paddy was sold at Rs. 300-325 per quintal against the MSP of Rs. 540 per quintal due to withdrawal of FCI from procurement.
Dumping of imported subsidised products
The dumping of imported, subsidised commodities and the removal of import restrictions (Quantitative Restrictions) is another dimension of the erosion of entitlements of agricultural producers in India. Prices of coconut have fallen from Rs. 10 per piece to Rs. 2, coffee prices have collapsed from Rs. 68 per kg to Rs. 26 per kg, pepper prices have fallen from Rs. 19,055 per quintal to Rs. 10,550 per quintal. Kerala farmers have suffered a loss of Rs. 6,645 per quintal during 2000 and to the price fall in major plantation crops such as coconut, rubber, pepper, arecanut, coffee, tea and cardamom. This exploitation of incomes translates into declining food entitlements.
The destruction of food entitlements by dumping is an unfair trade practice which is totally legal in the asymmetric and unbalanced W.T.O. rules. For example, U.S. soyabeans are cheap not because of cheap production but because of subsidies. The price of soyabeans is $155 a ton. And this low price is possible because the U.S. Government pays $193 a ton to these farmers, who would not otherwise be able to stay in production given the low commodity prices. This Government support is not really a farmer subsidy, it is an indirect corporate subsidy. As heavily subsidised soyabeans flooded India's domestic market, prices crashed by more than two-thirds. The local oil processing industry, from the small scale ghanis to larger mills, started to close down. Domestic oilseed production declined and domestic edible oil prices crashed. Groundnut prices went down by 30 per cent from Rs. 48 per kilogram to Rs. 37 a kilogram. Meanwhile some farmers protesting against the collapse of their markets were killed.
The dumping of subsidised soya, wheat, rice, sugar on Indian markets is called "competitiveness" by magazines such as Business India which have suggested that Indian farmers should be allowed to be destroyed by opening markets because they are not "competitive". Sharad Joshi who claims to be a farm leader and chaired the Prime Minister's Committee on W.T.O. and Agriculture has actually recommended that the Government implement an EXIT policy for peasants and farmers. It is this mindset of our elite which sees the rural poor as dispensable and disposable which is causing starvation deaths, even as grain rots in our godowns.
While the conditionalities from global trade and financial institutions are preventing the Government from supporting the poor to have access to adequate and nutritious food, they are promoting the diversion of subsidies from people to corporations. While people have been forced to buy wheat and rice at Rs. 11.30 per kg., because of the withdrawal of subsidies, export corporations such as Cargill are getting wheat and rice at highly subsidised prices. Using the artificially created surpluses as justification for exports, the Government will be exporting five million tonnes of wheat and three million tonnes of rice during 2001. While people pay Rs. 7,000 per tonne for wheat, exporters are getting it at Rs. 4,300 per tonne, a subsidy of Rs. 13.5 billion. While people pay Rs. 11,300 per ton for rice, exporters are getting at Rs. 5,650 per tonne, a subsidy of Rs. 60 billion. Exports increase while people starve. Corporations are subsidised while people's food subsidies are withdrawn. This is how globalisation is causing hunger and starvation in the Third World.
While people are being denied food, on grounds of cutting back public expenditure, the Government is committing higher public investment on airports and superhighways. The poor in India do not need airports - they need food.

(The writer is Director, Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, NewDelhi.)

बासमती उगाने वाले बेबस और बेचैन

शालिनी जोशी देहरादून से

बासमती के लिए मशहूर देहरादून के किसान बासमती जलाएँगे. इन किसानों ने एक सरकारी परियेजना के तहत बिना रासायनिक खाद का इस्तेमाल किए बासमती की जैविक खेती की थी लेकिन अब इस बासमती का कोई खरीदार नहीं मिल रहा है.
किसानों का कहना है कि इस तरीक़े से खेती करना महँगा पड़ता है और उत्पादन भी कम होता है.
ओमप्रकाश डोगरा देहरादून की विकासनगर तहसील में किसान एकता समिति के अध्यक्ष हैं. आज उनके घर के दालान में करीब 35 क्विंटल जैविक बासमती के बोरे एक तरह से बेकार पड़े हैं.
इस समस्या से वो गहरी हताशा में हैं, "जैविक खेती ने तो हमें खून के आँसू रुला दिए. हमारी उपज में चूहे और चिड़िया लग रहे हैं. अगर यही हाल रहा तो ज्यादा दिन नहीं जब यहाँ का किसान भी आंध्र प्रदेश की तरह आत्महत्या करने लगेगा."
बेहाल
ओमप्रकाश डोगरा अकेले ऐसे किसान नहीं हैं बल्कि उत्तरांचल में बासमती उगाने वाले करीब 500 किसानों की मनोदशा आज ऐसी ही है.
देहरादून का बासमती अपनी बेहतरीन खुशबू, साफ, लंबे, चमचमाते दाने और लज़ीज़ स्वाद के लिए दुनिया भर में मशहूर है.

बासमती का कोई ख़रीदार नहीं
इसकी कीमत आम तौर पर 70 से 100 रूपए प्रति किलो होती है लेकिन कीटनाशकों और रासायनिक खाद के अधिक इस्तेमाल से इसके गुण में कमी आती जा रही थी.
दूसरी ओर, अंतरराष्ट्रीय बाजार में जैविक खाद्य पदार्थों की बढ़ती माँग को देखकर सरकार ने तीन जिलों देहरादून, ऊधमसिंहनगर और नैनीताल में तीन साल पहले जैविक बासमती योजना शुरू की थी.
आज इन इलाकों में करीब 800 हेक्टेयर में लगभग पाँच सौ किसान हैं जो जैविक खेती कर रहे हैं और 1500 टन से ज्यादा बासमती बिना बिके पड़ी है.
किसी खेत को पूरी तरह से जैविक बनाने में कम से कम तीन साल लग जाते हैं लिहाजा इन किसानों की ये पहली फसल है जो पूरी तरह से जैविक है.
खेती का जैविक तरीका भले ही पौष्टिकता के लिहाज से बेहतर हो लेकिन अगर किसान का तर्क देखें तो रासायनिक खेती उसके लिए सस्ती और आसान थी.
जिस एक बीघे खेत से उन्हें तीन क्विंटल धान मिल जाया करता था अब उससे मुश्किल से एक क्विंटल धान उपज रहा है. इसी वजह से जैविक उत्पादों की कीमत ज्यादा होती है लेकिन अगर वो किसानों को मिले तब.
गुस्सा
सहसपुर के किसान सुरेश सिंह चौहान कहते हैं, "सरकार ने हवा में उत्तरांचल के जैविक राज्य घोषित कर दिया, विपणन की कोई व्यवस्था की नहीं. इससे भले तो हम रासायनिक खेती करते थे. सौ रूपए का दवा का डिब्बा लाते थे सारी खरपतवार खत्म हो जाती थी अब उसी के लिए हजार-हजार रूपए देकर मजदूर लगाने होते हैं."
सौ रूपए का दवा का डिब्बा लाते थे सारी खरपतवार खत्म हो जाती थी अब उसी के लिए हजार-हजार रूपए देकर मजदूर लगाने होते हैं

किसान सुरेश सिंह चौहान
किसान दोहरे संकट में इसलिए भी हैं क्योंकि इनकी उपज के जैविक होने का प्रमाणपत्र भी राज्य के जैविक बोर्ड के ही पास है. बंगलौर स्थित आईएमओ लिमिटेड से सरकार ने सामूहिक सर्टिफिकेट लिया था.
इस वजह से किसान स्वतंत्र रूप से अपना जैविक उत्पाद बेच भी नहीं सकते. अब जैविक बोर्ड ये कहकर अपना पल्ला झाड़ रहा है कि किसानों को खरीद का कोई आश्वासन नहीं दिया गया था.
बोर्ड की सचिव विनीता शाह कहती हैं कि "हम सिर्फ कंपनियों को यहाँ खरीद के लिए बुला सकते हैं इससे ज्यादा की किसानों को अपेक्षा नहीं करनी चाहिए. एक जर्मन कंपनी इसे 14 रू प्रति किलो की दर से खरीदने के लिये तैयार है लेकिन ये किसान खुद ही नहीं बेच रहे हैं. ये चावल ही तो है कोई सोना चाँदी तो नहीं."
किसानों का कहना है कि इस दर से उन्हें मुनाफा तो दूर, हर बीघे में करीब 3000 रू का नुकसान है. किसानों की चिंता ये भी है कि इनके खेतों में अभी जैविक गेहूं की फसल भी लगी है जो अगले दो महीनों में तैयार हो जाएगी और तब उसका क्या होगा.