Basmati rice, known for its long grain and unmistakable aroma, has become the center of a diplomatic dispute that crosses borders and now reaches Brussels. India and Pakistan claim ownership of this symbol of Asian cuisine, forcing the European Commission to intervene in an impasse that mixes tradition, trade and geopolitics. According to Euronews, the issue has gained weight in the context of negotiations for a trade agreement between the European Union and India, where basmati is one of the most delicate pieces on the board.
According to the publication, the European Commissioner for Trade, Maroš Šefčovič, admitted that the basmati dossier is among the most sensitive topics in the negotiations. The problem is simple to state but difficult to resolve: who has the right to use the name basmati: India, Pakistan or both?
Rice that crosses borders and rivalries
Basmati has been cultivated for centuries in the fertile plains of the Punjab, a region that is now divided between India and Pakistan. It is considered a product of shared origin, but each country wants exclusive recognition of the geographical indication (GI) in the European market. This status guarantees exclusive use of the name and protects the product against imitations, which has enormous economic value.
Euronews explains that India intends to register basmati as a product of Indian origin, citing its cultural and historical importance. Pakistan, on the other hand, argues that rice is also cultivated on its side of the border, including in areas of Kashmir, a territory in dispute between the two countries since 1947.
When rice became a diplomatic affair
In 2018, India submitted an application to the European Commission to register basmati as an exclusively Indian product, describing it as a rice “with an exquisite aroma, sweet flavor and smooth texture”, originating from the Indo-Gangetic plains. Pakistan responded five years later, in 2023, with its own request, which includes four Kashmiri districts on the source map: Mirpur, Bhimber, Poonch and Bagh.
This overlapping of requests has placed Brussels in an uncomfortable position. According to Euronews, the European Commission is now trying to mediate a solution without getting directly involved in the territorial conflict, a task that experts consider almost impossible.
A conflict that has been going on for a long time
The current dispute has roots in a past of interrupted cooperation. In the late 1990s, India and Pakistan joined forces against the American company RiceTec, which had registered a patent on basmati rice in the United States. The joint victory, which led to the revocation of the patent in 2001, seemed to herald a new era of understanding between the two countries.
However, political tensions re-emerged after the 2008 Bombay bombings, leading India to drop a joint request and move forward alone. Since then, attempts at understanding have failed, with each country claiming the right to protect its version of basmati on the European market.
Brussels on a knife’s edge
For the European Union, the case is more than an agricultural issue. The protection of geographical indications is a central issue in trade negotiations, and basmati has become a test of European diplomatic skill. “The Commission is trying to defuse a geopolitical conflict,” said trademark expert Matteo Mariano, from the Novagraaf office, cited by Euronews.
According to the same expert, Brussels could simply apply the “first come, first served” principle, but chose not to do so, precisely to avoid taking sides in a historic conflict.
The rice that continues to be shared, even at the table
While the European Union seeks a diplomatic solution, basmati continues to be exported by both countries around the world, including to Portugal, without consumers knowing exactly where the grain comes from. For now, the Commission is trying to maintain balance, knowing that any decision could generate political and commercial repercussions.
As summarized by , the rice that was supposed to unite cultures and palates has become a symbol of rivalry and delicate diplomacy, where even the simplest of dishes have a political flavor.
Also read:
