An opinion piece by Benoit Cassart, Member of the European Parliament
"Defence, energy, technology: dependence is our Achilles' heel. The signing of the Mercosur agreement is dangerous, when the European Union must maintain and strengthen its food sovereignty."
The European Union, born after the horror of the Second World War, was built as an open space, founded on law, dialogue, trade and cooperation. These principles are noble and have allowed us to build lasting peace, prosperity and a single market of unprecedented strength. But in a world where “chaos is no longer the insurgent's weapon but the seal of power” (Giuliano da Empoli, “L'heure des prédateurs”, Gallimard 2025), this openness has become a weakness.
From Brussels, we refuse to see that the world order has completely changed. Yet international law is regularly trampled underfoot.
The United States and China protect their markets, their industries and, above all, their agriculture. They sometimes do so brutally, sometimes subtly, but always with the same logic: defending their national interests. Meanwhile, Europe opens its trade borders, lowers its barriers, and signs unbalanced free-trade agreements that weaken its own producers.
This summer, we witnessed the "negotiations" between President Von der Leyen and President Trump on customs tariffs. Let's be frank: the European Union was completely taken for a ride!
Without blinking
But how is it possible that the world's leading trade power had to accept all the demands made by the United States without blinking? The answer is simple: dependence is our Achilles' heel.
For its defence and security, Europe remains largely dependent on NATO, that is, on the United States. In terms of energy supply, we depend on external suppliers for our gas and oil. For our communications and the digitalisation of our economies, we depend on American or Chinese digital giants, who moreover hold all our data. And even in health matters. After the pandemic, which revealed our dangerous dependence on external production chains, the imposition of 15% tariffs on European (non-generic) pharmaceutical products breaks thirty years of commitments between friendly countries and threatens both the supply of medicines and innovation in medical research, reducing health to a mere economic sector when it is also a universal common good…
This dependence results in a loss of room for manoeuvre. How can we negotiate on equal terms with Washington or Beijing when we know we need them to protect our borders, heat our homes, care for our citizens or keep our factories running?
And what is the response of a large part of Europe's leaders to this dependence that weakens us and turns us into prey? To open up further, to sign free-trade agreements such as the one with the Mercosur countries, without mirror clauses capable of safeguarding our agriculture and therefore our food sovereignty.
The Mercosur bloc is a genuine agricultural superpower, and our European farmers are unable to compete with Brazilian producers. Some supporters of the agreement point to the lower cost of these imports to ease the burden on consumers facing declining purchasing power. This is a completely irresponsible position. After defence, energy, technology and health, do we want to become dependent for our food too? Would it remain affordable if our local production disappeared? Do we need to be reminded that producing enough to feed one's population is the first pillar of a state's sovereignty? We saw this with the Russian invasion of Ukraine: Moscow used grain exports as a lever of blackmail against the rest of the world, causing instability and chaos as far as the African continent. The example of Gaza is tragically telling: by destroying agricultural land and cutting off access to water through the shutdown of desalination plants, the Israeli Government is using starvation as a weapon of war.
At the mercy of blackmail
Food, like gas or oil, is a geopolitical bargaining chip. Forgetting this means exposing ourselves to future crises.
The European Union must therefore maintain and strengthen its food sovereignty. This means protecting our farmers, ensuring sufficient local production and generational renewal, and supporting the ecological transition without sacrificing the resilience of our sectors. For a Europe unable to feed its population will depend on others to do so, and will sooner or later find itself at the mercy of blackmail and global instability.
In this context, continuing to sign free-trade agreements at the expense of our agriculture is a serious political mistake. The Mercosur agreement is the most glaring example. Must we sacrifice our food sovereignty for an agreement that would generate 0.1% growth in the EU by 2032, an estimated additional amount of between 10 and 20 billion in the most optimistic scenarios?
This is not about withdrawing into ourselves, or closing our borders. But it is urgent for Europe to understand that an open economy only makes sense if it is also able to protect its vital interests.