The statistics of 2018, unveiled recently, showed that, for the first time in recent history, France has become a net importer of food. The CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) has finally benefited other EU countries which, like Poland (products of plant origin) and Spain (products of animal origin), have taken EU market shares from it. Although French officials continue to claim the best quality of their products over other competitors, and French standards higher than those approved by EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), European consumers buy where they find the best quality/price ratio and the impression is that ratio is moving away more and more from the “Made in France“. This behavior of EU citizens is reinforced by the continuing decline in the purchasing power of Europeans as a consequence, in particular, of the decline of EU exports due to lack of competitiveness of the Bloc in the face of international competition. Finally, the reasons for the decline of Agricultural France (synonymous in this article of Agricultural EU) are numerous and varied (see below) which all go in the direction of an irreversible diminution of the influence of the Agricultural EU. At the same time, it is an opportunity that the ACFTA (African Continental Free Trade Area) should take advantage of to rebalance our continent’s trade relations with our partners in the globalized market in the future.
We go back a bit to briefly trace the path that led the Agricultural EU to play the leading roles in the global agri-food sector before forcing, soon, the EU to meet the same standards as other operators in the globalized agri-industrial sector.
In the aftermath of the Second World War, two different blocks of interests were formed. On the one hand, the Comecon regrouping the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), Eastern European countries and other communist countries elsewhere in the world and, on the other hand, the United States of America and the countries of Western Europe as main ally. Each bloc had its own specific rules for trading in their respective markets. The United States then regarded the Communist Bloc as an existential risk for America and sought to contain it by any means. To this end, to cement a strong alliance with its European allies, the Americans have apparently agreed to make some concessions. For example, not interfere in the affairs of Gaullist France, a recalcitrant ally, on the African continent. Since then, France would consider this circumstantial “tacit US acquiescence” as its privilege that it shares with its partners in the EU. In this respect, a little like the Comecon’s internal market, made hermetic to Western trade in those days by what it was called an “Iron Curtain“, France Agricole tried hard to take over the African market by a “Curtain of Standards ” and arranged to have them approved by the EU regulator. As a result, it has become very difficult for other countries in the world to trade with the countries of our continent without going through the “EU standards”. This status quo could have continued for generations to come if the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the erosion of the Soviet empire, had not allowed reshuffling the cards. For example, the US interest in a strong, and costly, partnership with Western Europe against the Soviets was no longer so relevant. With that, the Uncle Sam began, like the other world powers, to show more and more interest to trade directly with the African countries including also the countries of the Middle East. Regarding areas considered by Europeans as their private preserve, the Agricultural EU has mobilized accordingly to block the enthusiasm of Americans for trading in these areas. So, France Agricole did things in a structured and sustained way. First, it sensationalized all the agri-food practices of Americans that it considers to pose risks to the health of consumers. And the fact that the US won against these assertions before the WTO (World Trade Organization) has in no way discouraged French militancy. Then, since the nineties, the Agricultural EU has flooded African exporters with new specific requirements (standards outside the Codex Alimentarius) to respect in order to access the EU market. Moreover, non-compliance with these ‘standards’ leads to restrictions on the ‘offending’ operator’s export to the Community market. This is, considering that the EU is the main outlet for our African raw materials, a strong dissuasive argument for the operators of our continent. This may explain, among other things, why the promising Free Trade Agreement agreed between Morocco and the US fifteen years ago is still standing still.
It can be deduced from this observation that, despite their power and experience, the Americans have not been able to gain the upper hand over the arguments propagated by Agricultural EU to oppose the normal trade of many of US food products on the EU market. In addition, this propaganda of Agricultural EU greatly complicates the task for US food processors in penetrating food markets, like Africa, associated with that of the EU. It must also be said that the European argument in question evokes the fact that prices of “discredited” American food products are just as expensive as European ones. This to remove any financial interest for the European consumer for the “Made in USA“
But sometimes the solution comes from where you least expect it. Indeed, the EU has just signed a free trade agreement with Mercosur (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay). The USA considers Latin America as their area of influence and, as far as food sector is concerned, the standards in force in the zone are of FDA obedience since always. Agricultural France is already advancing the arguments of “Beef with hormones” and “Chlorine Chicken” in order to block the ratification of the agreement concluded between Mercosur and the EU. But this time, Latin American products of animal origin, which are consumed all over the world, including Switzerland, have the quality / price ratio on their side, what most consumers in the EU are looking for.
In any case, Agricultural EU will now be caught between a rock and a hard place for completing the agreement with Mercosur. On the one hand the European consumer who seeks to buy at the best price / quality ratio will therefore favor Mercosur products. On the other hand, you have France Agricole, represented mainly by French farmers, relatively few in number, who are against Mercosur food products. Indeed, French farmers are less accustomed to principles of competitiveness and, worse, have been made very dependent on CAP grants. Beautiful battles in perspective and, once is not custom, it is the Americans who will be in the boxes as spectators. They probably will like it
As far as we are concerned, our continental leaders would do well to follow closely how Agricultural EU will end this imbroglio and draw the necessary conclusions from them. That will help in discussions to come on the future of the Zleca in the face of an EU determined to keep our African market under their control.
