The European Parliament has chosen to submit the EU’s free trade agreement with four Latin American Mercosur bloc nations for review by the European Court of Justice.
This decision was revealed following a vote in the European Parliament on Wednesday.
The agreement has already been signed by Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, and is viewed as a significant move for the EU to explore new export markets.
European Parliament Vice-President Christel Schaldemose (S) expressed disappointment over the vote.
– It is concerning that the European Parliament has decided to delay the Mercosur agreement during a time of global instability.
– Europe needs robust new partners internationally, especially as we can no longer rely on traditional alliances and face pressures from both the east and west, stated Christel Schaldemose.
The European Commission has indicated that the agreement could take effect without the European Parliament’s approval. Olof Gill, the Commission’s spokesperson, noted they would proceed to implement the agreement temporarily while awaiting the court’s decision.
Thus, the European Parliament’s decision does not immediately halt the agreement.
– The European Commission regrets the European Parliament’s decision. Our analysis finds the concerns raised by the Parliament to be unfounded.
– The European Commission has addressed these issues in detail with the European Parliament, remarked Olof Gill.
He added that the European Commission will re-engage in dialogue with Parliament members.
– We will clarify why they should support the agreement and why it is crucial for the EU, said Olof Gill.
He highlighted that Ursula von der Leyen spoke in favor of enhancing EU independence in trade during Wednesday’s Parliament session.
This is crucial in a world, according to von der Leyen, increasingly dominated by “raw power.”
Olof Gill mentioned that the Mercosur agreement will be discussed at the extraordinary EU summit in Brussels on Thursday.
The agreement was approved by a qualified majority of EU member states after delays and ongoing political disagreements.
Italy ultimately supported the agreement, enabling the achievement of the required majority.
This decision was made despite opposition from major EU nations such as France and Poland, along with Austria, Hungary, and Ireland, who voiced concerns over potential impacts on European agriculture.
The European Parliament’s recent vote raises fresh doubts about the agreement, which has taken 26 years to negotiate and faced significant agricultural protests in countries including France, Poland, and Belgium.
This decision also contradicts the EU’s efforts to strengthen its trade independence amidst ongoing tensions with the United States, where tariffs of 15 percent on European goods have already been imposed.
The U.S. is now threatening additional tariffs on European countries in light of rising disputes over Greenland.
Consequently, Christel Schaldemose argues that the EU should maintain the agreement.
– The deal opens access to a market of approximately 700 million consumers and bolsters the European and Danish economies. The EU needs more partners, not fewer, asserts Christel Schaldemose.
In Wednesday’s vote, 334 Members of the European Parliament supported the court’s legal review, while 324 opposed it and 11 abstained.
Leave a Reply