More than ever, the road to signing the EU/Mercosur trade agreement is fraught with pitfalls. On Wednesday 17 and Thursday 18 December, hundreds of farmers will be gathering in Brussels to demonstrate their opposition to the trade agreement. This is because the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, intends to attend the Mercosur Summit on 20 December to sign the agreement. To do this, she needs the green light from the Council of the EU, by a qualified majority of Member States. But a number of EU countries are casting doubt on the nature of their final vote.
As a result, the vote is still not on the agenda, and in any case will not take place at the General Affairs Council on Tuesday. The Danish Presidency of the EU Council, which is in control of the timetable, wants the vote to take place before 20 December, but will not call a vote if it knows that the outcome will not be favourable. Indeed, it would not be totally opposed to the EU Council deciding at the beginning of 2026, under the Cypriot Presidency, if France and Italy were to provide guarantees that the Mercosur countries would sign the agreement after a further delay. To date, neither Paris nor Rome have given it any assurances to this effect.
Where do the opponents stand? On Monday 15 December, Ireland - previously opposed to the free trade agreement - did not deign to give a yes or a no in the run-up to the vote. The Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Helen McEntee, told the press that she was waiting for a concrete date for the vote. In the meantime, “we will continue to work with colleagues who share our concerns”, she reiterated.
Poland’s position is clearer. The agreement is harmful and the country will vote against it, several Ministers have said in recent weeks.
Hungary is also opposed to the agreement, because of the impact on the European agricultural sector.
As for France, which has always been angry with the agreement, its position has been ambiguous in recent months, after the President, Emmanuel Macron, sent out signals of openness ahead of the vote.
But its Prime Minister, Sébastien Lecornu, set the record straight on Sunday 14 December. “The conditions have not been met for the Council of the EU to vote on authorising the signature of the agreement”, he stated in a press release.
Emmanuel Macron has asked Ursula von der Leyen to postpone consideration of the agreement, according to AFP, citing a source close to the Élysée Palace. France’s objective is to continue working to obtain even more robust measures to protect the agricultural sector.
A little further north, Belgium will have to abstain from the vote, as the federal government does not have a clear-cut position on the agreement.
Austria is a priori bound by a 2019 resolution to vote against the agreement.
In theory, this is also the case in the Netherlands, where the House of Representatives passed a resolution in 2023 obliging the government to vote against the agreement. However, the Dutch government indicated its support for the project in November.
That leaves Italy, whose position is unclear at this stage. Part of the country is also concerned about the impact on the agricultural sector, but the prospect of outlets for Italian exports makes the decision a complex one.
If all these countries voted against, the European Commission would not be able to sign the free trade agreement. However, Rome would only need to support the agreement at the time of the vote for a qualified majority of Member States to be achieved. If Rome supports the agreement, the Danish Presidency of the Council would be prepared to override the French refusal, considering that France had already obtained all the guarantees requested.
For the time being, and despite the French request to postpone the vote, the European Commission indicated on Monday 15 December that it still had the ambition to sign before the end of the year. This signing “is of crucial economic, diplomatic and geopolitical importance”, said the Commission’s deputy spokesman for trade, Olof Gill.
Key vote in the European Parliament. Against this backdrop, MEPs will have to vote on Tuesday 16 December on the safeguard measure accompanying the agreement. A crucial vote, because a robust safeguard clause can reassure countries reluctant to sign up to the agreement.
But this gamble is a double-edged sword: if the EU adopts a regulation that introduces a safeguard clause that is very easy to activate, the Mercosur countries may well oppose it if they feel that the language goes too far.
In Parliament’s Committee on International Trade, MEPs have already come out in favour of a text that provides even greater protection for European farmers (see EUROPE 13768/13), compared with the position of the Member States (see EUROPE 13755/21).
Ahead of the plenary vote, around 20 MEPs from several political groups (EPP, S&D, Greens/EFA, The Left) have tabled amendments to go even further. In particular, they want to be able to activate the safeguard clause in the event of non-compliance with European environmental, health, animal welfare, food safety and labour standards. (Original version in French by Léa Marchal with Camille-Cerise Gessant)