Reinforcing bilateral relations. The initiative of the European Commission for an EU-Brazil partnership is finally moving away from unrealistic projects and turning instead towards the concrete reinforcement of bilateral relationships. How much time has been wasted in endless and fruitless negotiations, such as the creation of the “largest free-trade zone in the world” between the EU and Mercosur, which gave rise to much enthusiasm on the part of a number of members of the European Parliament and university professors! The most recent communication of the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament (see our bulletin on 9436) has two great merits: acknowledging the breakdown in EU-Mercosur relations; laying emphasis on the importance of relations with Brazil, ahead of the bilateral summit to take place in Lisbon on 4 July.
An acknowledged failure. The word “failure” does not feature in the text on EU-Mercosur negotiations; diplomatic protocol would not allow this. But you don't have to be particularly perceptive to be able to read this between the lines. The Commission indicates that EU-Mercosur negotiations “have not come to a conclusion due to lack of progress in the trade chapter thus preventing so far the establishment of a wider strategic association between the EU and Mercosur”. Of course, the EU “remains committed to consolidating a solid political and economic relationship with Mercosur as a block”, whilst at the same time developing “its bilateral relations with the other countries in the region”. As well as Brazil, it also refers to Argentina. The reinforcement of euro-Brazilian relations “will support intra-Mercosur integration as well as EU-Mercosur relations”. However, Mercosur “is going through a delicate phase (at the moment). The group still has work to complete on several aspects of its economic integration, such as the completion of the customs union (…). Mercosur governments are generally very wary in transferring power to supranational institutions in their pursuit of economic and political integration”. How delicately these things are expressed! The meaning of this is very simple: it is impossible for the EU to envisage an ambitious agreement between two groups, if there is no group on the other side: it is impossible to create a colossal free-trade zone if, on the other side, free-trade does not exist and if the institutions which are supposed to manage it have no powers (Europe's experiences show the extent to which economic and commercial integration presupposes common rules and supranational institutions).
The Commission observes that shoring up links between the EU and Brazil may help Mercosur to “boost its level of ambition and effectiveness”. Yet this is not a piece of advice or even a word of encouragement on its part, but no more than I hope, as it writes: “we therefore look to Brazil to make a constructive contribution towards the conclusion of a balanced and comprehensive EU-Mercosur agreement”. So be it. At this moment in time, certain Mercosur countries have no intention of liberalising trade.
Brazil, strategic partner. The Commission decision-makers seem to be aware of reality (it remains for them to convince just a few members of the European Parliament and the odd university professor), and they are finally focusing on bilateral relations with the countries of Mercosur which have the capacity and political goodwill to become a “strategic partner” for the EU, and it is entirely natural that Brazil should be the top of the list (with Argentina potentially in second place). The Commission's document is a hymn to the potential and to the inexhaustible capital of sympathy enjoyed by this country in the world, and in Europe in particular. The objective of the strategic partnership would not be merely economic in nature, but also broadly political: cooperation in order to support and reinforce the world regime of nuclear non-proliferation; the promotion of human rights and democracy: cooperation in the fight against poverty and inequality throughout the world; joint efforts within international bodies in terms of climate change, and so on.
But the main, and most concrete, aspect lies, not surprisingly, in the economic and also the scientific domain. Energy cooperation, of course, with bio-fuels at the top of the list; but also dialogue on industrial policy and intellectual property, studies into a Euratom-Brazil agreement, Brazil's participation in the Galileo project (“a perfect opportunity to deepen high-tech industrial and scientific cooperation between the EU and Brazil”), the revision of the current aviation agreements between Brazil and the countries of the Union “as a matter of urgency”, etc.
The bilateral summit of 4 July will hopefully provide the opportunity to launch the “strategic partnership”. The Council and Parliament are invited to take position very soon on the principles, and the Brazilian government to announce its point of view on the content and scale of this project.
(F.R.)