Voices from the field 1
Zainal Arifin Fuat, Serikat Petani, Indonesia
Current geopolitical and geo-economic tensions are reshaping trade relations and food systems across Southeast Asia. Trade policy is increasingly used as a strategic tool by powerful economies, placing pressure on countries in the region to open markets and adjust domestic regulations. US reciprocal tariff policies affect Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia, which are urged to negotiate concessions to maintain export market access. These developments carry significant implications for agriculture and rural livelihoods, particularly for small-scale food producers facing volatile prices and unequal market access.
Indonesia’s Agreement on Reciprocal Trade (ART) with the US illustrates the asymmetrical nature of emerging trade arrangements. While Indonesia is expected to increase imports of US agricultural commodities such as soybeans, wheat, and beef, Indonesian exports remain subject to tariffs and changing trade provisions that would favor the U.S but without equivalent guarantees for Indonesia. The agreement also obligates Indonesia to align with certain US trade restrictions toward other countries, raising concerns for state and food sovereignty.
For small-scale food producers across Southeast Asia, reciprocal tariff pressures and trade liberalization will intensify import competition, depress farm-gate prices, and weaken local food systems. These dynamics risk deepening dependency on global markets and undermining the ability of states to protect domestic agriculture. Defending food sovereignty requires reclaiming policy space to protect peasants, regulate imports, and strengthen local and agroecological food systems.
The conflict in West Asia, though geographically distant, significantly impacts Indonesia through soaring production costs. Rising global oil prices affect production and peasant welfare, as well as distribution by peasant cooperatives. Since oil is vital to food production and distribution for farming families, fuel price increases directly threaten agricultural viability.
Indonesian agriculture remains in transition from conventional to agroecological systems, meaning fertilizers are not yet fully produced domestically. High reliance on imported fertilizers substantially increases production input costs. Fuel price surges will destabilize food prices. With government food reserves still not sovereign, those most affected will be urban communities and peasants lacking sufficient food stocks. Food sovereignty and agroecological agriculture are essential responses to these cascading crises.
Voices from the field 2
Jose Maria Oviedo, National Union of Costa Rican Agricultural Producers (UNAG), Costa Rica / CLOC-La Vía Campesina
From a geopolitical perspective, the war in Iran highlights that the United States believes the world should belong to them and that they must hold power over all nations. They justify attacking Iran by claiming a need to destroy the region’s military capabilities, especially ballistic missiles, and to eliminate nuclear weapons. They also insist on changing Iran’s regime for supporting what they label as Western adversaries.
We have seen how the US believes that America is synonymous with the United States, where any government that disagrees with US policies must be intervened upon or invaded. For instance, Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela serves as a recent example. Countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, and Panama have all faced threats for not adhering to American directives.
Economically, the conflict in the West Asia — a region producing twenty percent of the world’s oil—has serious implications. Rising oil prices could lead to global inflation and even famine due to the significant impact on economies, including China’s. With China as a major wheat producer, shortages in grains could result from this situation, exacerbating food scarcity.
We argue that the US empire is collapsing. Historical examples, like Jimmy Carter’s attempts at positive alliances with China in 1979, contrast sharply with the US focus on global warfare. The financial toll of these wars has reportedly cost the American public 300 billion dollars, which has not been invested in the US or in community development globally.
Economically, we anticipate a significant US fiscal deficit (government spending higher than tax income), along with increased tariffs on exports to the US, particularly affecting Central America. As many countries in our region depend on oil imports, inflation poses a critical challenge. The depreciation of the dollar and efforts to appreciate it further threaten to escalate global inflation, making the situation even more precarious for nations reliant on imported oil.
Voices from the field 3
Andoni García, Euskal Herriko Nekazarien Elkartasuna – EHNE Bizkaia, Spain
The EU’s trade policy, starting with the General Agreement on Tariffs Trade (GATT) and the inclusion of agriculture and food in the WTO, has been decisive in agricultural and food policy and has had devastating consequences for small farmers. This subordination eliminated the market and price regulation instruments that the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) contained until 1992. Despite the WTO’s failure, the EU has pursued Free Trade Agreements without restraint, where agriculture and internal markets have been bargaining chips.
Opening to international markets, reducing tariffs, lowering prices for farmers, and the EU’s aggressive agroexport policy has caused a severe reduction in millions of small farmers. From 2013 to 2023, five million farms were lost in the EU. The EU and its agroexport policy have been directly responsible for speculative escalation on food globally. The agricultural model in the EU is increasingly agroindustrial and based on economies of scale.
Yet the EU is also less food self-sufficient today, as its food sovereignty and strategic autonomy are subordinated to Free Trade Agreements and the economic interests of elites embedded in globalization. In the previous legislature, the EU addressed how to respond to climate, environmental, biodiversity, energy, and food crises through the European Green Deal, Farm to Fork Strategy, and Biodiversity initiatives—though without questioning its trade policy.
The fragility of these approaches and their contradiction with international trade lobbies has become evident in the new geopolitical situation. The EU is backtracking on its political stance to address crises and strongly pursues Free Trade Agreements to project strength globally, yet this crumbles when its subordination to the US in decision-making becomes apparent. The European Commission has proposed, for the EU budget from 2028 onward, increasing military spending while decreasing support for farmers. The CAP and environmental protection policies are rapidly retreating.
Additionally, the European Commission has accelerated Free Trade Agreements, disregarding European Parliament decisions and widespread farmer opposition. And now, the US and Israeli attacks on Iran, triggering a war with global repercussions, have sparked fierce speculation on fuel, production costs, and food—again exposing risks to food sovereignty, food access, and the fragility of globalized food systems caused by EU policies.
Voices from the field 4
Annette Hiatt, National Family Farm Coalition/Land Loss Prevention Project, USA
Multilateral and international trade agreements often heavily impact small producers, but do not benefit or engage small producers. Many small farmers, such as those in North Carolina (southeast region of the US), are not directly involved in international trade, but the decisions made behind closed doors at the international level to shape and influence power relationships have a direct impact on those same growers and the communities they live in.
In January, it was estimated that trade tariffs could have a devastating impact on North Carolina’s agricultural economy with $1.2 billion in revenue losses and a possible loss of 8000 jobs. In the absence of price support for small-scale producers, the erratic use of trade tariffs can mean smallholders get further pitted against large-scale corporate agriculture for access to domestic markets.
More than 50% of North Carolina farms operate on less than fifty acres and more than 50% of farmers make less than $10,000 annually from farming. These are not the farmers engaging in international export, but often are the bedrock of local food systems feeding their communities. But they feel, deeply, that groceries cost more, and the costs for inputs, like fuel and fertilizer are rising. With farmers’ costs of production systematically exceeding the prices they are paid, mounting farm debt is pushing our small producers—the root of our rural communities—off the land. Those same small farmers hold the key to resilience and community building but are treated like pawns in a game and there is little value placed on production that also builds our local economies. Trade policy should strengthen the livelihoods of our small farmers and rural communities, facilitate land access and food sovereignty, and allow for stewardship that supports resilient and agroecological food production in the USA and abroad.