Imported Ukrainian Food Sydney EU Deal Raises Concerns Among Member States

Introduction

A recent deal on the transit of tariff-free Ukrainian grain has sparked “serious concerns” among a group of 12 European Union countries, including Germany and France. The deal, which was struck last month, aimed to address complaints from Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria about unfair competition and depressed prices for local farmers due to an influx of Ukrainian cereals. However, the larger group of member states now challenges the deal, citing concerns about its compliance with EU commercial rules, lack of transparency, and potential impact on markets beyond the Eastern European countries. This article delves into the details of the deal and the criticisms it has faced.

Concerns Raised by Member States

The 12 member states have expressed their concerns about the deal in a joint letter addressed to the European Commission. They argue that the measures adopted by the Commission without consulting other member states lead to differentiated treatment within the internal market, thereby undermining the integrity of the market itself. The letter, signed by the agriculture ministers of Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Slovenia, questions the lack of transparency in the deal and its potential implications for future similar cases. The letter further emphasizes the need for clarification on how the deal aligns with the EU’s commercial policy and its obligations towards Ukraine under the Association Agreement.

European Commission’s Response

In response to the criticism, the European Commission spokesperson confirmed that the executive had received the letter and would respond in due course. The spokesperson defended the temporary deal, stating that there were clear arguments to provide support to farmers affected by the influx of Ukrainian grain. The Commission emphasized the importance of the flow of agricultural products from Ukraine and the need to ensure that Ukraine can continue to export its grains. Regarding transparency, the spokesperson stated that all 27 member states were informed about the grain deal before its official adoption.

The Temporary Deal Under Scrutiny

The temporary deal, which was reached between the European Commission and the five member states that had imposed unilateral bans on Ukrainian cereals, aims to address the distortion of domestic markets and the negative impact on local farmers. The deal allows the transit of four Ukrainian products – wheat, maize, rapeseed, and sunflower seed – through the Eastern European countries but prohibits their storage or purchase for domestic consumption. Instead, the products are sent directly to other member states or shipped worldwide. The deal also includes a €100 million support package for affected farmers and a commitment to monitor market trends caused by other agri-food products.

Criticisms and Ukraine’s Response

The joint letter from the 12 member states marks the second instance of criticism faced by the grain deal. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also expressed his dissatisfaction with the restrictions on exports during a joint press conference with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. President Zelenskyy emphasized the need for consultations with Ukraine and the prompt removal of restrictions. The grain deal has raised concerns about the future of Ukraine’s accession to the EU and the potential challenges it may pose for protecting farmers in member states.

Conclusion

The concerns raised by a group of 12 EU member states about the recent deal on the transit of tariff-free Ukrainian grain have reignited a political controversy within the bloc. The member states argue that the deal goes against EU commercial rules, lacks transparency, and requires further consultations. The European Commission defends the temporary deal, highlighting the need to support Ukrainian farmers and ensure the continued export of grains. As the controversy unfolds, the fate of the deal and its implications for future trade agreements remain uncertain.