See Chilean apples, Brazilian cereals or Canadian beef flooding the European market at their expense. This prospect is one of the fears raised by French farmers who continue to demonstrate on the highways of France on Tuesday January 30. In their sights: free trade agreements, these partnerships concluded by the European Union with various parts of the world which, according to agricultural unions, open the way to unfair competition.

Several free trade agreements have in fact been signed by the European Union in recent years, all with the same objective: to facilitate the movement of goods and services.

“These agreements aim to reduce customs duties, with maximum quotas for certain agricultural products, and non-tariff barriers,” explains Elvire Fabry, senior researcher at the Jacques-Delors Institute, responsible for the geopolitics of trade. “They also have an increasingly broad regulatory scope to promote European standards for investment management, protection of intellectual property, geographical indications, and sustainable development standards.”

Mercosur in the viewfinder

Some countries thus have a complete free trade agreement with the EU because they are part of the European Economic Area. This is the case for Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland. This allows them to enjoy the freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people.

Others have concluded agreements of more variable geometry with the EU. Among them, Canada – with Ceta which partially entered into force in 2017 – Japan, Mexico, Vietnam and even Ukraine. More recently, in November 2023, Brussels opened the door to New Zealand, with an agreement which should apply from 2024, and with Kenya. Negotiations are also underway with India and Australia.

But the one which crystallizes the main tensions is the draft agreement between the European Union and Mercosur. Discussed since the 1990s, this trade partnership with Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay would create the largest free trade zone on the planet, a market encompassing 780 million people.

However, the food aspect of the latest version of the text, established in 2019, particularly worries French farmers. The latter would establish quotas for Mercosur countries to export each year, with little or no customs duties, 99,000 tonnes of beef, 100,000 tonnes of poultry or even 180,000 tonnes of sugar. In exchange, customs duties would be lowered for the export from the EU of many protected designation products.

At a time when Brussels is pushing farmers to accelerate the ecological transition, these agreements would open the door to massive imports, at more competitive prices, of products that do not meet the same environmental and social standards as those originating in Europe. , denounce the unions. “Unfair competition”, they summarize, pointing in particular to the breeding conditions practiced in South America, with the use of GMO fodder or even the use of growth-stimulating antibiotics.

Also read: The EU defends “green” trade, but still wants to extend its free trade agreements

The unions, of all tendencies, thus stepped up to the plate after the European Commission assured, Wednesday January 24, "that a conclusion of negotiations with Mercosur" was possible "before the end of this mandate". That is to say ahead of the European elections, in June.

Immediately, the FNSEA, the majority union, called for a “clear refusal of free trade agreements”. For its part, the Peasant Confederation calls for an “immediate end to negotiations” for this type of agreement.

A contrasting assessment

“In reality, the impact of these free trade agreements varies depending on the sector,” explains Elvire Fabry of the Delors Institute. “The negotiations ahead of the agreements aim to calibrate the opening of trade to limit the negative impact on the most exposed sectors. And, at the same time, the latter could be winners in other agreements. In the end, it is "It's about finding a point of overall balance."

This disparity is glaring in the agricultural sector. “The wine and spirits industry or the dairy industry will have more to gain than breeders, for example,” continues the economist. According to a report from the National Assembly in 2023, the wine and spirits sector, but also that of the dairy sector, is in fact “the major beneficiary of free trade agreements”.

The existence of trade agreements making it possible to eliminate differentiations in customs duties is an 'overdetermining factor' in the competitiveness of French wines", estimated FranceAgriMer in a 2021 report. The majority of free trade agreements are declining or in fact eliminate customs duties for the export of many controlled appellation products, a category to which many wines belong.

On the other hand, for meat, the impacts are less easy to determine. If the balance between imports and exports seems to be to the advantage of the EU for pork, again according to FranceAgriMer, poultry exports seem to be decreasing under the effect of the agreements. Hence fears, for example, about the planned treaty with New Zealand, which provides for the importation to the European Union of 36,000 tonnes of sheep meat, the equivalent of 45% of French production in 2022. As for cereals, France remains largely in surplus, except for soya.

“A bargaining chip”

Beyond the impacts on agriculture, “this debate on free trade agreements must take other issues into account,” insists Elvire Fabry. We are in a context "where the EU is seeking to secure its supplies and in particular to secure its supplies of strategic minerals. We must not neglect Brazil's resources in lithium, cobalt, graphite, etc."

The agreement with Chile should thus make it possible to export strategic minerals in exchange for agricultural products. For its part, Germany is a fervent defender of the agreement with Mercosur, seeing it as an outlet for its industrial sectors, explains the specialist.

“In practically all free trade agreements, agriculture is always the bargaining chip against the sale of cars or Airbus planes,” laments Véronique Marchesseau, general secretary of the Confédération paysanne to AFP.

The agreement with New Zealand, for example, will "destabilize the lamb market in France", deplores Michèle Boudoin, president of the national sheep federation (FNO) to AFP. “We are not against trade, we know that Germany must export its cars, that France must sell its wheat and we are told that we need an ally in the Pacific against China and Russia. But then we have to give us support, to make high-end lamb for example,” she pleads.

Finally, “there is an issue of influence”, according to Elvire Fabry. “These agreements also remain a way for the EU to promote its environmental standards to lead its partners on the path to ecological transition,” she hopes, “even if this is negotiated.” An argument shared by the Minister of Agriculture, Marc Fesneau: “In most cases, the agreements have been beneficial, including to French agriculture,” he says on X, before adding: “ They will be even more so if we enforce our standards."

Towards a suspension of negotiations on Mercosur

?

Faced with the anger of farmers, the French government continued to seek reassurance, even though negotiations were relaunched by a meeting between Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Lula in December. “France is very clearly opposed to the signing of the Mercosur treaty,” assured Gabriel Attal on January 26.

Monday evening, the Élysée even assured that the negotiations had been interrupted in Brussels due to opposition from France. The conditions are “not met” to conclude the negotiations, acknowledged Éric Mamer, spokesperson for the European Commission. “But the discussions continue.” Before being officially adopted, the agreement must be voted unanimously in Parliament, then ratified individually by the 27 member states of the European Union.

The France 24 summary of the week

invites you to look back at the news that marked the week

I subscribe

Take international news everywhere with you! Download the France 24 application