By Aggeliki- Myrsini Spiliopoulou,
In 1957, the founding EU agreements mentioned the term “common market” to describe the purpose of the unity of all the European markets. Now, it is replaced by the term “single market”, which has to do with the structure of the market of one undivided nation. One of their first goals was always to create an environment where products will be exchanged under the same rules, with no extra taxes. This organization, after following the demand from the conventions procedure, is able to make legally-binding, for EU members, deals regarding commerce, with other nations or organizations. One of the newest ones is the convention between the EU and some of the countries of Mercosur.
It took almost 20 years of negotiations (28 June of 1999-6 December of 2024) for the European Union and the countries of South American Mercosur bloc to come to this agreement. The EU interests were clear from the beginning: as long as the products and services of the past 2 years, of more than 84 billion in worth were exported to Mercosur, making Europe crucial to Mercosur (16.9% of their total trades for the last year), a unifying agreement would be beneficial. Many Latin American countries had already dealt with Europe, but now Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Urugay are committed, and it is supposed to be a win-win result for both parties with expanded expectations for EU. The goals are described to be: the decrease of trade barriers, which will consequently bring more investments in the industry and in small businesses, make stronger trading rules, and promote common values. Under those terms, commerce between two parties will be increased: “opening opportunities for European farmers, enhancing trade and investing in critical raw materials, trade,and sustainable development and sanitary and psycho-sanitary measures” are some of the benefits.
It is only one day ago that the EU signed a deal with Mercosur and reactions are already enough. Though the European Commission reveals statistics that should reassure farmers that the results will satisfy them, it seems it was not enough. As it is underlined, European products such as wines, cheese, chocolate, and pork are very popular in the countries participating in the convention because of their good quality. That is why this deal will boost exporting products, through the decrease of, for the time being, high tariffs. However, people working in the agricultural production complain about the future competition. They claim that the imported products will be of extremely low quality and because of the lack of tariffs, their price will be unbeatable. The EU promises that the quality standards regarding food will not change. Still, France, Poland, Austria, and the Netherlands, countries with great agricultural markets, disagree with the terms of the convention asking for stronger safeguards as Mercosur countries have low quality standards. With this side also stands Greenpeace: the convention has also an environmental aspect as it will contribute negatively to the deforestation of the Amazon.
The future is always unstable. What for some looks fruitful, for others seems dangerous. No assurance is enough when it has to do with your job, your planet and —most importantly— with your health. Bringing the countries of Mercosur to one of the most important aspects of the European plan —markets unity— is a great mater and is reasonable to provoke. For the ones dealing in agriculture any fear is reasonable and protesting is the only way to express themselves. But we all have to think: are all those guarantees enough?
References
- EU’s Mercosur deal facing objections. Bloomberg. Available here
- EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement – In brief. European Commission. Available here
- EU-Mercosur agreement. European Commission. Available here
- Questions and answers on the EU-Mercosur partnership agreement. European Commission. Available here
- What beef do EU farmers have with the Mercosur free trade deal?. Euronews. Available here
- Β. Χριστιανός, Ρ.-Ε. Παπαδοπούλου, Μ. Περάκης. “Εισαγωγή στο δίκαιο της Ευρωπαικη Ένωσης”. Νομική βιβλιοθήκη, 2η έκδοση.
