The work on a region-to-region association agreement between the EU and Mercosur could serve both regions well. But to do this successfully, we need to give the negotiators a completely new formulated mandate, established in a transparent and participatory process.
The current mandate was endorsed by Council in 1999, after much controversy over the impact of an agreement on agriculture. It is 18 years old and was never made public.
Almost half of the states that now make up the EU were not yet members in 1999. The UN had not yet formulated the millennium development goals.
Lessons from the financial markets crisis had not yet been learnt. Google was just a new search engine with 11 employees. Times have changed, meaning a new mandate is necessary. The old mandate gives simplistic trade liberalisation too much preference over meaningful cooperation.
Consequently, the negotiations were stalled for a long time. But after the election of market-liberal President Mauricio Macri in 2015, Argentina reversed course and became the strongest supporter in Mercosur of rapidly concluding a free trade agreement with the EU, with support also coming from the new leader in Brasilia, Michel Temer.
This is not good news for our citizens. According to the EU's official sustainability impact assessment for the potential agreement with Mercosur, it will have a detrimental impact on the rural livelihoods of the poor in Latin America. The agreement accelerates the transition from small scale to large scale agriculture.
Significant incremental effects on rural livelihoods, poverty and gender inequality will occur, if not effectively countered.
The authors state, "Where the existing level of stress is close to a critical threshold level, any further deterioration is likely to be judged as significant and therefore requiring careful consideration on the part of trade negotiators and policymakers in the EU and Mercosur."
Computer modelling predicts an increase in meat production in Brazil and Paraguay of up to 30 per cent.
Water and land resources come under pressure. The Brazilian Cerrado savannah will be threatened by extended cattle ranching and soy bean production. Biodiversity in the wetlands in the Orinoco delta and other river deltas risks falling victim to the expansion of plantation forestry.
The study also points out the consequences for Poland, Italy, Spain, France and Hungary, where two thirds of the EU's workers in agriculture are employed. "Employment in primary commodity production is likely to fall", and "Opportunities for re-employment would be lower in the EU-10 compared to the EU-15."
The agricultural sectors most in danger would be smallholders in general, and producers of beef, dairy, and sugar in particular.
With agricultural goods accounting for more than 50 per cent of Mercosur exports into the EU, it is obvious that lowering tariffs in this segment is the major offensive interest of the region's mega producers.
But the negotiations are also raising concerns among industry. I had a chance to listen to directors of German car brand production sites in Argentina and Brazil. Their costs per car are higher than in Europe.
Existing tariff s and non-tariff barriers provide them with a certain protection. If these were dismantled without transition periods, factories might have to close down.
We should make an active step away from the narrowness of a negotiation path defined by vested trade interests only. I urge Council and Commission to take this opportunity to start a transparent and participatory process for a new mandate. Business as usual is bound to fail.