The European Parliament has sent a strong political signal to the European Commission: no EU-Mercosur agreement can be accepted without genuine guarantees of reciprocity.
The agriculture-specific safeguard clause, announced by the European Commission as part of the EU-Mercosur agreement, is not an integral part of the agreement and does not bind the Mercosur countries in any way. It appears only in a unilateral declaration by the European Commission, adopted by the College of Commissioners on 3 September 2025, when the agreement was approved.
In that declaration, the Commission expressed its intention to put forward a draft regulation. This was adopted by the Council without amendment. After a failed attempt to force it through via an emergency procedure, the text was, however, amended by the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade (INTA) on 8 December.
“I am particularly pleased that my amendment, which introduces the essential principle of reciprocity for both finished products and production methods, was adopted by the INTA Committee and included in the final compromise. Safeguard clauses and mirror clauses are complementary: you cannot simply protect the market based on volumes and prices without protecting our farmers against unfair competition. The rest is smoke and mirrors,” said Benoît Cassart, Member of the European Parliament (MR/Renew Europe).
MEPs had no say over the actual content of the EU-Mercosur agreement, as trade policy is an exclusive competence of the European Commission. “The European Parliament can only say “yes” or “no” to the agreement. When the institution representing the European peoples had the chance to speak, particularly on the safeguard clauses, it clearly affirmed the urgency of integrating reciprocity and mirror clauses into the EU-Mercosur agreement,” Benoît Cassart stressed.
The process is now entering the trilogue phase, the final negotiation between the Commission, the Council and the Parliament. “We fear that the reference to reciprocity will disappear during the trilogue. That would be a real slap in the face for the Parliament and, through it, for citizens, consumers, farmers and climate activists,” Benoît Cassart protests.