Officially, the EU’s Mercosur trade deal is a defeat for Europe’s farmers. In reality, farm lobbies just can’t stop winning. EU countries endorsed the bloc’s long-delayed agreement with South American nations on Friday, clearing the way for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to fly to Paraguay later this week and close a deal that has haunted Brussels for more than two decades. The agreement is going through despite tractor protests, border blockades and fierce opposition from farm groups and capitals including Paris and Warsaw. But the price of getting Mercosur over the line was steep. In the run-up to the endorsement, Brussels quietly stacked the deck in farmers’ favor. Import safeguards were hardened. Controls tightened. And last week, the Commission unveiled a €45 billion budget maneuver allowing governments to shift more money to farmers under the EU’s next long-term budget. Taken together, the concessions mean Mercosur will enter into force wrapped in protections and paired with a farm budget settlement that leaves the sector stronger than before. “Other sectors complain,” said one Commission official involved in agricultural policy. “Farmers block roads.” The official, like others in this story, was granted anonymity to speak freely. The blunt assessment captures a familiar reality inside the EU institutions. Farmers may represent a shrinking share of Europe’s economy, but they remain one of its most powerful political constituencies, capable of reshaping trade deals, budgets and reform agendas even when they fail to block them outright. Ultimately, to get Mercosur over the line, Brussels had to back away from plans to loosen farmers’ grip on the EU budget and shift money to other priorities. PRESSURE THAT WORKS The leverage farm leaders wield rests on more than theatrics. Few officials in Brussels dispute that large parts of the sector are under real strain. Farm incomes are volatile. Costs for fuel, fertilizer and feed have surged. Weather has become harder to predict. Working days are long and isolation is common in hollowing rural communities. “I understand the anger,” Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen told POLITICO in an interview last month, as Brussels prepared for tractors to roll into the EU quarter. Christophe Hansen said the Commission had “heard the concerns of farmers” and responded with “strong and unprecedented support measures.” | Photo by Omar Havana/Getty Images Sympathy for farmers runs high across much of Europe, tied not just to economics but to culture, place and identity. That has always made farm subsidies one of the most politically sensitive lines in the EU budget — and one the Commission knew would be hardest to touch. That sensitivity was on display again last week, when agriculture ministers traveled to Brussels for a hastily convened meeting outside the formal calendar, called in response to farmer protests only weeks earlier. Inside, the language was ritualistic. Praise for farmers. Assurances they were being listened to. Repeated references to unprecedented safeguards and financial backing. Hansen summed it up afterward, saying the Commission had “heard the concerns of farmers” and responded with “strong and unprecedented support measures.” REFORM MEETS REALITY This outcome marks a sharp reversal of earlier ambitions inside the Commission. It’s also a reminder of just how high the stakes are when farm subsidies are in play. The Common Agricultural Policy remains the single largest line in the EU budget, absorbing roughly a third of total spending and anchoring a political contract that dates back to the bloc’s postwar foundations. Public money, in exchange for food security and rural stability, has long been one of Europe’s core bargains. That bargain has survived decades of reform. The CAP has been trimmed, greened and made more market-oriented. But its central promise — that farming would be protected — has never disappeared. After von der Leyen’s re-election in 2024, officials quietly explored loosening how tightly farm spending is locked into the EU budget. Draft ideas for the post-2027 budget would have made farm funds more flexible and easier to redirect to priorities such as defense, climate transition or industrial policy. It was a technocrat’s answer to a crowded budget. It did not survive contact with politics. The proposal landed as farm incomes came under pressure from rising costs, climate volatility and disease outbreaks. Tractors returned to Europe’s streets. Agriculture ministers closed ranks, warning of political fallout in rural heartlands. Farm lobbies mobilized in force. Hansen spent much of his first year in office traveling to farms and meeting unions, describing agriculture as a strategic asset and warning of a “convergence of pressures” hitting the sector. Behind closed doors, he fought to keep large chunks of farm funding protected. Tractors park in front of the Arc de Triomphe during a demonstration of the French agricultural union Coordination Rurale (CR) in Paris, France, on January 8, 2026. | Jerome Gilles/NurPhoto via Getty Images Those efforts didn’t calm farmers’ anger. Instead, pressure became constant, feeding into a series of concessions that steadily narrowed the scope for reform. First came assurances that most farm spending would remain ring-fenced in the post-2027 budget. Then came a new rural spending target, designed to funnel more money back into countryside projects. Last week, to get the Mercosur deal over the line, the Commission went further, proposing that farmers get early access to up to €45 billion from a broader cash pot the EU would have been saving for a rainy day. In effect, much of the post-2027 EU farm budget is on track to be sealed at levels approaching today’s, before negotiations have even begun in earnest. LOSING THE TRADE FIGHT, WINNING THE POLITICS The €45 billion now being front-loaded was originally conceived as crisis insurance. After the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Brussels concluded that future EU budgets needed more flexibility to respond quickly to shocks. Money reserved for incremental spending reviews was meant to be the first line of defense in the next crisis. If national capitals embrace the Commission’s proposal, much of that money would be locked in for farmers before the cycle even starts, leaving less for other priority areas. Mercosur became the perfect vehicle for that pressure. Long championed by industrial exporters, the deal turned into shorthand for everything farmers fear about global competition and loss of control. The reality is more uneven. Some EU farmers, particularly in high-end food, wine and dairy, stand to gain from better access to Mercosur markets. Others, especially in beef and poultry, face tougher competition. Yet even there, trade analysts have long dismissed fears of South American goods flooding the EU as exaggerated. But nuance rarely survives a protest banner, and even the unprecedented concessions haven’t stopped farmers from protesting. The EU’s largest farm lobby, Copa-Cogeca, said Friday that the process of getting the Mercosur deal across the line “erodes trust in European governance, democratic processes and parliamentary scrutiny at a time when institutional credibility is already under strain.” The group said it would continue mobilizing farmers. Privately, Commission officials express frustration about the farm lobbies’ hardening demands.  One said that even though Brussels bends over backwards to meet farmers’ demands, every concession still falls short for farm leaders. Another pointed to Commissioner Hansen’s efforts to engage in direct dialogue with farmers across the EU. “And still, they talk as if we had done nothing,” the official said, referring directly to Copa-Cogeca. For now, farm leaders are winning.  Von der Leyen might be boarding that plane to South America. But when she returns to Brussels, they will already be gearing up for the next fight, confident they can lose the trade battle and still bend Europe’s policy in their favor.

Europe’s biggest ever trade deal finally got the nod Friday after 25 years of negotiating.  It took blood, sweat, tears and tortured discussions to get there, but EU countries at last backed the deal with the Mercosur bloc — paving the way to create a free trade area that covers more than 700 million people across Europe and Latin America.  The agreement, which awaits approval from the European Parliament, will eliminate more than 90 percent of tariffs on EU exports. European shoppers will be able to dine on grass-fed beef from the Argentinian pampas. Brazilian drivers will see import duties on German motors come down.  As for the accord’s economic impact, well, that pales in comparison with the epic battles over it: The European Commission estimates it will add €77.6 billion (or 0.05 percent) to the EU economy by 2040.  Like in any deal, there are winners and losers. POLITICO takes you through who is uncorking their Malbec, and who, on the other hand, is crying into the Bordeaux. WINNERS Giorgia Meloni Italy’s prime minister has done it again. Giorgia Meloni saw which way the political winds were blowing and skillfully extracted last-minute concessions for Italian farmers after threatening to throw her weight behind French opposition to the deal.  The end result? In exchange for its support, Rome was able to secure farm market safeguards and promises of fresh agriculture funding from the European Commission — wins that the government can trumpet in front of voters back home. It also means that Meloni has picked the winning side once more, coming off as the team player despite the last-minute holdup. All in all, yet another laurel in Rome’s crown.  The German car industry  Das Auto hasn’t had much reason to cheer of late, but Mercosur finally gives reason to celebrate. Germany’s famed automotive sector will have easier access to consumers in LatAm. Lower tariffs mean, all things being equal, more sales and a boost to the bottom line for companies like Volkswagen and BMW. There are a few catches. Tariffs, now at 35 percent, aren’t coming down all at once. At the behest of Brazil, which hosts an auto industry of its own, the removal of trade barriers will be staggered. Electric vehicles will be given preferential treatment, an area that Europe’s been lagging behind on.  Ursula von der Leyen Mercosur is a bittersweet triumph for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Since shaking hands on the deal with Mercosur leaders more than a year ago, her team has bent over backwards to accommodate the demands of the skeptics and build the all-important qualified majority that finally materialized Friday. Expect a victory lap next week, when the Berlaymont boss travels to Paraguay to sign the agreement. Giorgia Meloni saw which way the political winds were blowing and skillfully extracted last-minute concessions for Italian farmers after threatening to throw her weight behind French opposition to the deal. | Ettore Ferrari/EPA On the international stage, it also helps burnish Brussels’ standing at a time when the bloc looks like a lumbering dinosaur, consistently outmaneuvered by the U.S. and China. A large-scale trade deal shows that the rules-based international order that the EU so cherishes is still alive, even as the U.S. whisked away a South American leader in chains.  But the deal came at a very high cost. Von der Leyen had to promise EU farmers €45 billion in subsidies to win them over, backtracking on efforts to rein in agricultural support in the EU budget and invest more in innovation and growth.   Europe’s farmers  Speaking of farmers, going by the headlines you could be forgiven for thinking that Mercosur is an unmitigated disaster. Surely innumerable tons of South American produce sold at rock-bottom prices are about to drive the hard-working French or Polish plowman off his land, right?  The reality is a little bit more complicated. The deal comes with strict quotas for categories ranging from beef to poultry. In effect, Latin American farmers will be limited to exporting a couple of chicken breasts per European person per year. Meanwhile, the deal recognizes special protections for European producers for specialty products like Italian parmesan or French wine, who stand to benefit from the expanded market. So much for the agri-pocalpyse now.  Mercosur is a bittersweet triumph for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. | Olivier Matthys/EPA Then there’s the matter of the €45 billion of subsidies going into farmers’ pockets, and it’s hard not to conclude that — despite all the tractor protests and manure fights in downtown Brussels — the deal doesn’t smell too bad after all.  LOSERS Emmanuel Macron  There’s been no one high-ranking politician more steadfast in their opposition to the trade agreement than France’s President Emmanuel Macron who, under enormous domestic political pressure, has consistently opposed the deal. It’s no surprise then that France joined Poland, Austria, Ireland and Hungary to unsuccessfully vote against Mercosur.  The former investment banker might be a free-trading capitalist at heart, but he knows well that, domestically, the deal is seen as a knife in the back of long-suffering Gallic growers. Macron, who is burning through prime ministers at rates previously reserved for political basket cases like Italy, has had precious few wins recently. Torpedoing the free trade agreement, or at least delaying it further, would have been proof that the lame-duck French president still had some sway on the European stage.  Surely innumerable tons of South American produce sold at rock-bottom prices are about to drive the hard-working French or Polish plowman off his land, right? | Darek Delmanowicz/EPA Macron made a valiant attempt to rally the troops for a last-minute counterattack, and at one point it looked like he had a good chance to throw a wrench in the works after wooing Italy’s Meloni. That’s all come to nought. After this latest defeat, expect more lambasting of the French president in the national media, as Macron continues his slow-motion tumble down from the Olympian heights of the Élysée Palace.  Donald Trump Coming within days of the U.S. mission to snatch Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and put him on trial in New York, the Mercosur deal finally shows that Europe has no shortage of soft power to work constructively with like-minded partners — if it actually has the wit to make use of it smartly.  Any trade deal should be seen as a win-win proposition for both sides, and that is just not the way U.S. President Donald Trump and his art of the geopolitical shakedown works. It also has the incidental benefit of strengthening his adversaries — including Brazilian President and Mercosur head honcho Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva — who showed extraordinary patience as he waited on the EU to get their act together (and nurtured a public bromance with Macron even as the trade talks were deadlocked). China  China has been expanding exports to Latin America, particularly Brazil, during the decades when the EU was negotiating the Mercosur trade deal. The EU-Mercosur deal is an opportunity for Europe to claw back some market share, especially in competitive sectors like automotive, machines and aviation. The deal also strengthens the EU’s hand on staying on top when it comes to direct investments, an area where European companies are still outshining their Chinese competitors. Emmanuel Macron made a valiant attempt to rally the troops for a last-minute counterattack, and at one point it looked like he had a good chance to throw a wrench in the works after wooing Italy’s Meloni. | Pool photo by Ludovic Marin/EPA More politically, China has somewhat succeeded in drawing countries like Brazil away from Western points of view, for instance via the BRICS grouping, consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and other developing economies. Because the deal is not only about trade but also creates deeper political cooperation, Lula and his Mercosur counterparts become more closely linked to Europe. The Amazon rainforest  Unfortunately, for the world’s ecosystem, Mercosur means one thing: burn, baby, burn. The pastures that feed Brazil’s herds come at the expense of the nation’s once-sprawling, now-shrinking tropical rainforest. Put simply, more beef for Europe means less trees for the world. It’s not all bad news for the climate. The trade deal does include both mandatory safeguards against illegal deforestation, as well as a commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement for its signatories. 

STRASBOURG — Even if EU countries overcome their gargantuan divisions and sign off on the Mercosur trade agreement this week, a major hurdle awaits in the European Parliament. Defenders of the deal will need to fend off an attempt to freeze its ratification as more than 140 anti-Mercosur lawmakers seek to refer it to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) for an opinion on whether the text complies with the European Union’s founding treaties. The EU’s top court could take up to two years to issue a decision. The holdouts have enough votes to add a motion to the agenda of the Parliament after the deal is signed. The resolution to refer the deal to the CJEU would need a simple majority of votes cast to pass. European lawmakers voted by a wide margin earlier on Tuesday to approve additional safeguard measures to protect European farmers should local markets be destabilized by a glut of cheaper agricultural produce from Mercosur member nations (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay). Out of the 662 lawmakers attending, 431 MEPs voted in favor, 161 against and 70 abstained. “The Parliament has shown that it is possible to move forward responsibly in trade policy without putting our farmers at risk,” Gabriel Mato, the lead lawmaker on the file, told a news conference after the vote. Mato, a Spanish Christian Democrat, said he hoped that EU co-legislators would be able to move forward quickly at a lightning round of interinstitutional talks on Wednesday afternoon. Once there’s an agreement on the safeguard instrument, a vote on the overall deal by EU ambassadors is penciled in for Friday, three diplomats said. Critical here will be whether the safeguards — quick action by the Commission to protect European farmers in the event of a sudden influx of beef, poultry or other food imports from Mercosur countries — are enough to overcome doubts in France and Italy. Only then would Commission President Ursula von der Leyen be able to fly to Brazil on Saturday to finally sign the long-awaited trade accord. Germany, which leads the EU’s pro-Mercosur camp, is warning that another delay would kill the deal. “If there is no possibility of a deal this week then it’s probably going to be dead. We see that the deal already starts unraveling,” warned one German government official, who said the call by holdouts in the Parliament to refer the file to the CJEU could “kick the can down the road.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity. Speaking alongside Mato at the news conference in Strasbourg, Bernd Lange, chair of the Parliament’s trade committee, said the deal would not survive another delay. “If there is not a signature on Dec. 20 this agreement is dead,” the German Social Democrat said. SECOND ATTEMPT For a cross-party group of 145 MEPs belonging to centrist political families — spanning the center-right European People’s Party, the Socialists and Democrats, the liberals of Renew, the Greens and The Left — the safeguards are not enough. They are doubling down on their calls for an in-depth legal review to start in January. “We want to delay the Mercosur adoption process as long as possible,” Manon Aubry, co-chair of The Left group, told POLITCO. Aubry is one of the most vocal critics of the deal, which she said would hurt European farmers and undermine the EU’s climate and environmental standards. The group of MEPs tried in November to refer the deal to the CJEU, but the legislature’s administration said they had to wait until the Council finalized the deal. After a meeting with Greens MEP Saskia Bricmont, Parliament President Roberta Metsola “committed” to schedule a plenary vote on the issue as soon as the Council — the intergovernmental branch of the EU — signs off on the deal, Bricmont told her fellow Mercosur skeptics in an email seen by POLITICO. The meeting followed criticism by MEPs who blamed Metsola personally for blocking the move. Metsola’s team has responded that she followed the advice of the Parliament’s legal service and its interpretation of the rules. During a meeting of political group leaders last week “it was decided to wait for the final agreement, and once this arrives the request for an opinion will be added to the plenary agenda,” Juri Laas, a spokesperson for Metsola, confirmed. If the legal review is approved the Parliament would not be able to vote on the deal itself until the CJEU has issued its opinion. This would typically take between 18 and 24 months. That could push a final Mercosur deal back to the summer of 2027, or even 2028. The court “may, on its own initiative, adjust the pace of the proceedings where institutional or political necessity makes a timely response especially important,” the court’s press service said. That would at least allow time for the Commission to propose new ways to ensure reciprocity, equal climate commitments on both sides, and further ways to protect farmers, said French liberal MEP Jérémy Decerle. “I don’t know if this will bury the agreement, but I hope in any case that it will make the Commission think,” Decerle said. Additional reporting by Nicholas Vinocur.

STRASBOURG — The European Parliament voted Tuesday to tighten additional protections on the EU’s trade agreement with the South American Mercosur bloc, opening the way for talks with member countries that will need to find a rapid compromise to finally get the deal done. Lawmakers voted by a wide margin to approve additional safeguard measures to shield European farmers should local markets be destabilized by a glut of cheaper agricultural produce from Mercosur. Out of the 662 lawmakers attending, 431 MEPs voted in favor, 161 against and 70 abstained. The safeguards represent a key concession for France and Italy to back the overall deal in a separate vote by member countries, and will determine whether European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen can fly to Brazil to sign the controversial deal in Brazil this weekend. A lightning round of talks with EU countries is expected Wednesday afternoon to finalize a common position on the additional instrument. The talks are expected to be prickly, given the time pressure and the fact that the Council of the EU, which represents governments, adopted the original Commission proposal as its position. Final haggling over the agreement with Mercosur — which groups Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay — may run into a summit of European leaders being held in Brussels on Thursday and Friday of this week. Overall, lawmakers backed lower thresholds for Brussels to look into unfair competition and to carry out investigations more quickly. Their position would require the Commission to investigate surges of beef or poultry from Mercosur countries as soon as imports rise by more than 5 percent compared to the previous three-year average, and if those imports are priced at least 5 percent below comparable EU products. In the original Commission proposal, both thresholds were set at 10 percent. Further turning the screws on the safeguards, the lawmakers also added a “reciprocity obligation” that would require Mercosur countries to apply EU production standards in order to access the continent’s market of 450 million people. This last tweak is set to be one of the most difficult points in the negotiation with the Council and the Commission.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission has done everything in its power to accommodate the concerns of member countries over the EU’s trade deal with the Latin American Mercosur bloc and get it over the finish line, Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič told POLITICO. “I hope we will pass the test this week because we really went to unprecedented lengths to address the concerns which have been presented to us,” Šefčovič said in an interview on Monday.  “Now it’s a matter of credibility, and it’s a matter of being strategic,” he stressed, explaining that the huge trade deal is vital for the European Union at a time of increasingly assertive behavior by China and the United States. “Mercosur very much reflects our ambition to play a strategic role in trade, to confirm that we are the biggest trader on this planet.” The commissioner’s remarks come as time is running short to hold a vote among member countries that would allow Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to fly to Brazil on Dec. 20 for a signing ceremony with the Mercosur countries — Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. “The last miles are always the most difficult,” Šefčovič added. “But I really hope that we can do it this week because I understand the anxiety on the side of our Latin American partners.”  The vote in the Council of the EU, the bloc’s intergovernmental branch, has still to be scheduled. To pass, it would need to win the support of a qualified majority of 15 member countries representing 65 percent of the bloc’s population. It’s not clear whether France — the EU country most strongly opposed to the deal — can muster a blocking minority. If Paris loses, it would be the first time the EU has concluded a big trade deal against the wishes of a major founding member. France, on Sunday evening, called for the vote to be postponed, widening a rift within the bloc over the controversial pact that has been under negotiation for more than 25 years. Several pro-deal countries warn that the holdup risks killing the trade deal, concerned that further stalling it could embolden opposition in the European Parliament or complicate next steps when Paraguay, which is skeptical toward the agreement, takes over the presidency of the Mercosur bloc from current holder Brazil. Asked whether Brussels had a Plan B if the vote does not take place on time, Šefčovič declined to speculate. He instead put the focus on a separate vote on Tuesday in the European Parliament on additional farm market safeguards proposed by the Commission to address French concerns. “There are still expectations on how much we can advance with some of the measures which are not yet approved, particularly in the European Parliament,” he stressed.  “If you look at the safeguard regulation, we never did anything like this before. It’s the first [time] ever. It’s, I would say, very, very far reaching.” 

BRUSSELS — The French government called on Sunday to postpone a crucial vote by countries on the EU-Mercosur trade agreement, widening a rift within the bloc over the controversial pact. “France is asking for the December deadlines to be pushed back so we can keep working and get the legitimate protections our European agriculture needs,” the office of Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu said Sunday evening. The statement confirmed a POLITICO report on Thursday that Paris was pushing for a delay. It comes within sight of the finish line for the European Union to finally close the agreement with Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay that has been in negotiations for over 25 years and would create a common market of over 700 million people. Denmark, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU, has vowed to hold the vote in time for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to fly to Brazil on Dec. 20 to sign the deal. Several countries warn that the holdup risks ultimately killing the trade deal, concerned that further stalling it could embolden opposition in the European Parliament or complicate next steps when Paraguay, which is skeptical toward the agreement, takes over the presidency of the Mercosur bloc from current holder Brazil. Pro-deal countries, including Germany, Sweden and Spain, argue that France’s concerns have already been accommodated, pointing to proposed additional safeguards designed to protect European farmers in the event of a surge in Latin American beef or poultry imports. But with those safeguards still not finalized, France says it still can’t back the deal, wary that it could enrage the country’s politically powerful farming community. Brussels also announced this month it was planning to strengthen its border controls on food, animal and plant imports. “These advances are still incomplete and must be finalized and implemented in an operational, robust and effective manner in order to produce and appreciate their full effects,” Lecornu’s office said. Denmark, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU, has vowed to hold the vote in time for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to fly to Brazil on Dec. 20 to sign the deal. | Wagner Meier/Getty Images Despite Denmark’s resolve to hold the vote in time, final talks among EU member countries may not be wrapped up before a summit of European leaders on Thursday and Friday this week. A big farmers’ protest is planned in Brussels on Thursday. The Commission declined to comment.

BRUSSELS — Denmark is holding the line and pressing ahead with plans to schedule a crucial vote of EU ambassadors on the EU-Mercosur trade deal next week, in a tug-of-war splitting countries across the bloc. “In the planning of the Danish presidency, the intention is to have the vote on the Mercosur agreement next week to enable the Commission President to sign the agreement in Brazil on Dec. 20,” an official with the Danish presidency of the Council of the EU told POLITICO. This is the first official confirmation from Copenhagen that it will go ahead with scheduling the vote over the deal with the Latin American countries in the coming days, despite warnings from France, Poland and Italy that the texts as they stand would not garner their support.  This risks leaving the Danish presidency of the Council short of the supermajority needed to get the deal over the line. Under EU rules, this would require the support of a “qualified” majority of EU member countries — meaning 15 of the bloc’s 27 members representing 65 percent of its population. The outcome of the vote will determine whether European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen can fly, as is now planned, to Brazil on Dec. 20 for a signing ceremony with her Mercosur counterparts. France however has been playing for time in an effort to delay its approval of the accord, which has been more than 25 years in the making — a strategy several diplomats warn could ultimately kill the trade deal.  They cite fears that further stalling could embolden opposition in the European Parliament or complicate the next steps when Paraguay, which is more skeptical of the agreement, takes over the presidency of the Mercosur bloc. “If we can’t agree on Mercosur, we don’t need to talk about European sovereignty anymore. We will make ourselves geopolitically irrelevant,” said a senior EU diplomat. European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, are expected to descend on Brussels on Thursday for a high-stakes EU summit. While not formally on the agenda, the trade deal with Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay is expected to loom large. A farmers demonstration is also expected in Brussels on the same day.  Countries backing the deal, including Germany and Sweden, argue that France has already been accommodated, pointing to proposed additional safeguards designed to protect European farmers in the event of a surge in Latin American beef or poultry imports. The instrument, which still requires validation by EU institutions, was a proposal from the Commission to placate Poland and France, whose influential farming constituencies worry they would be undercut by Latin American beef or poultry.  The texts submitted for the upcoming vote were published last week and include a temporary strengthened safeguard, committing to closely monitor market disruptions — one of the key conditions for Paris to back the deal.

BRUSSELS — France is playing for time over a crucial vote on the EU’s trade mega deal with the Latin American Mercosur bloc, three EU diplomats told POLITICO, in a strategy that one warned could kill the long-awaited accord.  With U.S. President Donald Trump having slammed Europe as “weak” and “decaying,” the European Commission is racing to prove otherwise — by rushing before Christmas to lock in the trade deal with Mercosur, which groups Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. Now, just over a week before Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hopes to fly to Brazil for a signing ceremony, France is raising the alarm that its longstanding demands haven’t been met. Paris warns it won’t be able to support the pact in a looming vote by member countries, suggesting it be held in January instead, according to the diplomats.  That could leave the Danish presidency of the Council short of the supermajority needed to get the deal over the line. Under EU rules this would require the support of a “qualified” majority of EU member countries — meaning 15 of the bloc’s 27 member countries representing 65 percent of its population. The French government reiterated on Thursday that it wasn’t satisfied with the agreement and that its final decision will depend on the progress made toward its demands.  “France is a big agricultural power, we defend our agricultural interests very firmly in these negotiations … We continue working on this agreement, which is not acceptable as it stands on the day I am speaking to you,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Pascal Confavreux told POLITICO. Confavreux declined to say when asked whether France was pushing to delay the vote to January. A senior EU diplomat warned that the long-awaited trade deal — which has been a quarter century in the making and would create a common market of over 700 million people — would not survive another delay.  “If [von der Leyen] does not sign it, if we do not allow her to sign it on the 20th, it’s dead,” said the diplomat, who was granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter. “And then we really need to think about whether that’s where we want to be in the world.”  COALITION OF THE UNWILLING Ireland, which remains one of the more skeptical countries due to its large farming constituency, said Thursday it was “working with like-minded countries” on its position on the agreement — referring to a so-called coalition of the unwilling that has varied over time and included countries like Poland and Austria.  “The key question now is whether a blocking minority still exists. And I think the jury is still a little out on that,” said Deputy Prime Minister Simon Harris. The stalling tactics will infuriate pro-Mercosur nations led by Germany, which argue that the French have already been accommodated, including by the proposal of additional safeguards to protect European farmers in case Latin American beef or poultry flood EU markets.  Paris is adamant that its three core conditions — the inclusion of “mirror clauses,” stronger sanitary controls, and the agricultural safeguards — have still not been met.  A separate plenary vote still needs to be held in the European Parliament this coming Tuesday on the farm safeguards. The chamber’s trade committee last week approved compromise amendments to tighten the protections. Yet a late flood of new amendments could complicate matters just two days before EU leaders are due to hold their year-end summit in Brussels. A diplomat from one Mercosur country said the signing date was still on: “We are still talking about Dec. 20.”  “Nobody has abandoned that yet,” said the diplomat, who was also granted anonymity to discuss the extremely sensitive matter.  Bloomberg first reported on the delay.  Giovanna Faggionato and Kathryn Carlson contributed to this report. 

OTTAWA — It all started with an avian flu outbreak last winter on a small British Columbia ostrich farm. The beleaguered flock’s brush with disaster has now spiraled into a national standoff over science and personal freedoms. And it’s one that extends beyond Canada, as top Trump administration health officials have become personally involved. After the Canadian Food Inspection Agency ordered the owners of Universal Ostrich Farms to kill more than 300 birds last year, they refused, sparking a legal and political battle that on Thursday will reach Canada’s Supreme Court. It is a winding, only-in-the-Trump-era political saga that involves a New York City grocery magnate, a celebrity doctor turned agency head and the lightning rod American ambassador to Canada. And the 10-month fight over the flock has evolved into a wider debate about government overreach, institutional trust and the international rules that guide Canada’s trade policies. “We’re not criminals, we’re farmers,” Katie Pasitney, who co-owns Universal Ostrich Farms, recently told reporters. “We’re doing nothing wrong.” In the U.S., she has rallied allies like Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who agree. Like her, Kennedy and members of his Make America Healthy Again movement believe the order to kill the birds amounts to government overreach based on outdated policies. Kennedy says the Canadians should study the birds rather than kill them to understand why some birds survive the flu. The controversy has stirred up debate across Canada’s political landscape. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, caught between his populist base and party moderates, is under pressure to defend the birds — a dilemma exposing fractures in his support ahead of a 2026 leadership review. Prime Minister Mark Carney has so far managed to dodge the issue as his government faces calls to be more transparent and retest the birds. Lawmakers from across party lines told POLITICO the issue resonates with constituents from British Columbia to Ontario. “We should not have been able to garner more attention and more support internationally from the Trump administration than our own government,” Pasitney said. THE OSTRICHES Last December, after receiving an anonymous tip, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency showed up at Universal Ostrich Farms in Edgewood, British Columbia, to test the flock. When two ostriches tested positive for avian flu, the agency ordered the entire flock culled. Court documents show that 69 birds died in December and January after the agency declared an outbreak. Over 300 birds survived, but the CFIA ordered them destroyed under Canada’s “stamping-out” policy — a measure aligned with the policies of the World Health Organization, the U.N.’s health agency, designed to help prevent viral spread among animals and people while maintaining trade stability. The farm owners objected vociferously, but they weren’t the only ones. “We understand the importance of containing the bird flu and the important role that agency plays. What’s hard to watch is a lack of discretion and ability to evaluate case-by-case scenarios,” British Columbia Premier David Eby told CBC in May. Universal Ostrich Farms has bred the birds since the mid-1990s. At first they raised them for slaughter, but in recent years they began using the ostrich eggs for research. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the farmers began collaborating with researchers in Japan and Boston studying antibodies from the eggs. The farm argues its ostriches that survived the avian flu outbreak have developed herd immunity to H5N1 and that their eggs hold scientific insight into the illness. But the CFIA disputes that claim. “Through a thorough review of scientific peer-reviewed literature, no evidence was found that a particular ostrich flock would be superior to other ostrich flocks for antibody production,” the CFIA said in a statement in May. The farm is seeking an exemption to save its ostriches, but the Federal Court of Canada and the Federal Court of Appeal have upheld the decision. On Sept. 22, the CFIA took control of the ostrich enclosure — a first for Canada, even though it has plenty of experience killing birds: More than 14 million commercial and backyard birds have been culled in recent years, including more than 8.7 million in British Columbia. For now, the ostriches remain alive … behind police tape. THE MAHA MOVEMENT South of the border in the United States, the birds have attracted an unlikely patron. Although New York billionaire John Catsimatidis is best known as a business owner, GOP megadonor and outspoken talk show host, Pasitney knew he was also an animal lover. Earlier this year, she called into his WABC radio station, hoping to catch his attention, and told him and Curtis Sliwa, the recently defeated GOP candidate for New York City mayor, on “Sid & Friends in the Morning” that “the Canadian government wants our farm killed off of two tests.” The farmer’s gambit worked. Not only is Catsimatidis now bankrolling the Universal Ostrich Farms’ legal battle against the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, but he also has recruited members of the Trump administration to the fight, including Kennedy and Mehmet Oz, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Kennedy and his “Make America Healthy Again” movement have a natural ally in the Canadian farmers. Both distrust the World Health Organization and allege that pharmaceutical companies are shaping government decisions, including around vaccines. President Donald Trump said he would withdraw the U.S. from the WHO on his first day in office, accusing it of mishandling the Covid pandemic. The withdrawal takes effect in January. In May, Kennedy pulled $590 million in funding for pharmaceutical company Moderna that the Biden administration had granted in January to help develop vaccines against potential pandemic flu viruses, such as bird flu, arguing mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits for these respiratory viruses. The same month, Kennedy met with the CFIA asking it to spare the birds by collaborating with U.S. health agencies on a long-term study, arguing the flock could offer valuable scientific insight into H5N1 immunity. Oz even offered the birds sanctuary at his Florida ranch, a request that U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra said has been approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Catsimatidis said he also mentioned the ostriches to Trump. “I spoke to President Trump about it, too. He knows about it,” Catsimatidis told POLITICO in July. The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment. Catsimatidis, along with those in the MAHA movement and many backers of the ostrich crusade, are skeptical of mRNA vaccines, often advocating for natural therapies as an alternative. “Maybe some of the drug companies, the pharmaceutical companies, probably hate Secretary Kennedy for setting them straight,” Catsimatidis said. “Maybe they don’t want cures.” The CFIA says there’s “no linkage to the application of the stamping out policy at the ostrich farm and the availability of human avian influenza vaccines.” DANIELLE SMITH AND DOUG FORD In Canada, some of the country’s top conservative leaders have realized the fight over the birds is bigger than just one flock. As in the United States, the movement against established public health practices has become an important political constituency to be wooed. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith of the United Conservative Party asked her agriculture minister how the province would handle a similar outbreak. “If we can find a better way than doing mass culls in situations like this, I think it’s probably worth it to try to find a better way to do it,” Smith said in July. Protesters have shown up at the offices of Conservative MPs in Alberta, and some MPs tell POLITICO they hear about the ostriches often from constituents. “This case has really taken on a lot of public sentiment behind it,” Smith said. Ontario Premier Doug Ford, a self-proclaimed animal lover and member of the Progressive Conservative Party, wants the ostriches spared too. Ford previously praised Catsimatidis’ commitment to animal protection, noting that he “puts his money where his mouth is.” “Anything John needs, I’m always there to support him,” Ford said. Both premiers maintain a relationship with Catsimatidis unrelated to the flock. His Red Apple Group conglomerate, which includes energy businesses, purchases oil from Alberta, and Ford frequently appears on Catsimatidis’ radio show. PIERRE POILIEVRE Not all conservative politicians have waded into the fray — and it’s costing them. Pierre Poilievre’s grip on his Conservative Party is showing strain as he faces pressure to speak up in favor of the birds. So far, the usually outspoken leader has avoided saying the word “ostrich” altogether. “This is just another example of total Liberal incompetence,” Poilievre has said when asked about the culling. Poilievre, who must win over Liberal voters to become the next prime minister, is focused on broader issues like cost of living, crime and inflation. But during the Covid-19 pandemic he aligned himself with the “Freedom Convoy” demonstration — which opposed pandemic measures and vaccines — that blockaded downtown Ottawa for three weeks and halted almost C$4 billion in Canada-U.S. trade. The movement continues to oppose government overreach, with organizer Tamara Lich backing the birds and hosting benefit concerts for the ostriches. Convoy-aligned supporters are noticing Poilievre’s silence. Conservative influencers who promoted Poilievre’s run for prime minister in the April election — and who have stood by him since — are now calling him out and blaming his inner circle for giving him bad advice. “Pierre please read the room. It’s honestly so painful to watch you fumble these easy layups,” one wrote on social media in September. “Can you please use your voice to speak up for Canadians?” another said. “The [British Columbia] Ostrich standoff is a grave injustice.” Poilievre risks losing support from his base, including those who support the MAHA movement, if he backs the cull. But if he speaks out against the cull, the Liberals could paint him as flouting public health and hurting Canadian trade. By criticizing the health agency, he sticks with his brand of attacking federal bureaucracy. Next January, Poilievre will face a scheduled leadership review. The Liberals’ prospects are tied to his future. Many Liberal MPs hope Poilievre will stick around given that he’s unpopular with their constituents. MARK CARNEY Prime Minister Mark Carney has not touched the issue publicly. The Prime Minister’s Office declined to comment on the ostriches, or to say if Trump has brought up the birds during their meetings. “No comment,” the Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement. He ignored a written request that Kennedy, Oz and Catsimatidis sent in July, offering “to stand with you in a joint public statement that highlights cross-border compassion and thoughtful decision making.” Canadian Health Minister Marjorie Michel has the authority to direct the CFIA to call off the cull, but she has also remained silent, even after Green Party Leader Elizabeth May asked her to retest the birds. When asked by POLITICO on two separate occasions, Michel’s office said she won’t be commenting on the ostriches. Last month, with tensions growing between protesters and national police outside the B.C. farm, Canada’s Supreme Court granted an interim hold on the culling. It will decide on Thursday whether to hear the case. If it rejects it, the culling order stands — and the ostriches will be killed.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission has told Mercosur countries that it will propose an internal workaround to satisfy the demands of France, Poland and Italy to better protect their farmers in a landmark trade deal with the South American bloc, two senior Mercosur diplomats told POLITICO.  These safeguard measures would remain internally on the EU side, the Commission told its Mercosur counterparts on Tuesday, meaning that both sides would not have to renegotiate the long-awaited accord, the diplomats said.  Brussels will on Wednesday release the texts of its trade agreement with the Latin American trade bloc as it seeks to close the controversial deal that has been under negotiation for a quarter of a century. It will also adopt the text of an upgrade to the EU’s existing trade deal with Mexico. The EU executive is banking that skeptical governments will have been persuaded by U.S. President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade policies to swing round behind the deal with Mercosur — which groups Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay — to broaden their trading relationships. French President Emmanuel Macron has fought a rearguard action against the accord, channeling the concerns of farmers over a potential glut of cheap beef and poultry from Brazil and Argentina. Poland and Italy have also voiced concerns, but Macron still appears to lack the votes in the Council of the EU, the bloc’s intergovernmental arm, to block the accord. Seeking to address the French concerns, Brussels in June floated the idea of a side declaration that would not require talks with Mercosur to be reopened, POLITICO reported at the time.  French President Emmanuel Macron has fought a rearguard action against the accord, channeling the concerns of farmers over a potential glut of cheap beef and poultry from Brazil and Argentina. | Guillaume Horcajuelo/EPA As expected, the agreement will be split between its trade and political sections in order to fast-track its implementation, said the Mercosur diplomats, who were granted anonymity to discuss the closed-door discussions. This would avoid lengthy ratification by the EU’s numerous national (and even sometimes regional) parliaments. While the approval of the trade elements only requires the blessing of a qualified majority of 15 of the EU’s 27 member countries, the political part of the agreement, which touches on national competences such as investments, requires unanimity.