South American Bloc Looks To Asia, Europe In Face Of Trump Trade War
"It's time for Mercosur to look toward Asia," President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said, extolling the potential benefits of deeper relations with Japan, China, South Korea, India, Vietnam and Indonesia.
In a reflection of regional tensions, however, Argentina's President Javier Milei threatened to go it alone if necessary to secure a free trade deal with the United States.
"We will embark on the path of freedom, and we will do so together or alone because Argentina cannot wait," Milei warned, calling for "more freedom" to negotiate.
The libertarian leader, a huge fan of Trump, has made no secret of his disdain for Lula, referring to him in the past as "corrupt" and a "Communist."
Lula, on his first trip to Argentina since Milei took office in December 2023, had no bilateral talks scheduled with the self-declared "anarcho-capitalist."
The veteran Brazilian leftist, who took over Mercosur's rotating presidency from his Argentine counterpart, has accused Milei of talking "nonsense."
Lula said that under his leadership, Mercosur would aim to "strengthen inter-bloc trade with external partners" and to implement a landmark trade agreement with the European Union.
Brussels in December struck a deal with Mercosur's founding members -- Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay -- to create a free trade zone of around 700 million consumers.
The agreement has been 25 years in the making, but still needs to be ratified by EU member states.
It has faced stiff opposition from France, where farmers worry about being undercut by less-regulated Latin American peers.
Uruguayan President Yamandu Orsi said that it was now "time to resume negotiations with key partners such as South Korea and Canada."
Uruguay has for decades sought a relaxation of the bloc's rules, which prevent agreements with other countries without the consent of all partners.
Climate change, the energy transition, combating organized crime and promoting technological development would be Mercosur's main objectives during the next six months, Lula said.
Steps were discussed to make progress on trade agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Canada, as well as update accords with Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and the Dominican Republic, and to advance regional gas integration.
On Wednesday, Mercosur foreign ministers announced a free trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association, made up of non-EU members Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland.
Adding to the tense atmosphere surrounding the summit, Lula took the time to visit his ally Cristina Kirchner, the former Argentine president who is under house arrest.
Lula, who was granted permission by a court to see Kirchner, spent almost an hour at her apartment in Buenos Aires before leaving without speaking to supporters and journalists waiting outside.
Kirchner, the standard-bearer of the Argentine left for over two decades, was convicted of "fraudulent administration" while president between 2007 and 2015.
The 72-year-old, who says her trial was an attempt to silence her criticism of the right, began a six-year sentence last month after losing a Supreme Court appeal. Lula called for the South American Mercosur bloc to deepen ties with Asia AFP Argentina's self-declared 'anarcho-capitalist' leader Javier Milei waves upon arrival at the Mercosur summit AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
11 hours ago
- DW
Do EU structures enable far-right misuse of public money? – DW – 07/04/2025
A leaked audit accuses far-right parties of improperly spending millions in EU funds. Critics say it's not just a scandal but a symptom of the EU system's deeper problems. From donations to dog shelters to questionable contracts with politically affiliated companies, far-right members of the European Parliament have been accused of funnelling public funds towards personal or ideological allies. An internal parliamentary audit obtained by a group of investigative journalists from German broadcaster ARD's magazine show Kontraste, German newspaper , French newspaper and Austrian media outlet, Falter, reveals that the now-defunct far-right Identity and Democracy group, commonly referred to as ID, may have spent at least €4.3 million ($5.1 million) in EU operating funds on what the European Parliament's own administration calls "unjustified and potentially unlawful" transactions. Every year the European Parliament allocates funds for the administrative and operational expenses of each political grouping in it, usually between €6 million to €7 million annually. Those funds are meant to support legislative work — such as funding policy research, running public events related to EU politics, or producing communications materials that explain their activities to citizens. Around 5% of this budget can be transferred to external organizations but donations to local charities, national campaign efforts, or groups with no clear link to EU-level work are explicitly prohibited. However the internal audit alleges that around 80 of the ID group's expenses do not meet that requirement. The improper spending allegedly includes fictitious service contracts, improper tender procedures and donations to associations unrelated to parliamentary activities and connected to far-right figures, the investigating publications reported. The scale of the findings suggest that this was more than administrative sloppiness and raises deeper questions about how the EU's own structures may be enabling such abuses. As an example, the report says the ID group — which disbanded in the summer of 2024 but previously included Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National, or RN, Germany's Alternative for Germany, or AfD, Italy's Lega and Austria's Freedom Party, or FPÖ — donated €1,000 ($1200) to the president of a French-Russian cultural association, Teremok. She is the spouse of Gregoire Eury, an RN councillor for the Grand Est region. This was just one of many connections between the associations that benefited from ID donations and far-right officials from ID-affiliated parties. Other donations simply reflected the broader political affinities of ID elected officials. In Germany, SOS Leben (or "SOS Life," in English), which is linked to the AfD, received €3,500 to support anti-abortion campaigns. In France, €1,000 went to the Catholic identitarian association SOS Calvaires to restore a parish. Around €600,000 reportedly landed with , a far-right Austrian newspaper close to the FPÖ, with ID paying for advertising far above market rates. Money also went to animal shelters and charities — not necessarily a bad thing, but also not acceptable under EU rules. French companies close to Marine Le Pen were among the biggest beneficiaries: Two firms tied to her longtime political allies reportedly received more than €3 million in total. One of them has previously been implicated in another EU funding scandal. The former secretary general of now defunct ID group, Philip Claeys, denied any wrongdoing and told the investigating journalists that all the payments were "duly invoiced and justified." Claeys said that an external auditor and then the European Parliament had approved the ID group's yearly financial statements. Donations by the group were apparently based on a rule called "Article 68." Only thing is, the investigative journalists found, there's no such thing as "Article 68." Yet it appeared in multiple years of published accounts without triggering alarms. When contacted, the Belgian auditors responsible declined to comment. "This is not an isolated incident," Nick Aiossa, director at Transparency International EU, told DW. "This seems to be a scheme that that ran over many years, involved many entities cross-border." Without the proper checks in place, he adds, this could easily happen again today. It is true that this is far from the first time that European MEPs have been caught misusing EU money. In March, Marine Le Pen was sentenced in France to four years probation and banned from holding political office after being found guilty of embezzling European parliamentary funds through a fake jobs scam. She has appealed the ruling. And it's not only the far right. Past scandals have implicated politicians across the spectrum. The so-called Qatargate scandal in 2023 exposed bribery and cash-for-influence schemes involving current and former MEPs. And in 2018, investigative journalists went to court seeking further information on what's known as "general expenditure allowance," or GEA, an amount paid monthly to MEPs for expenses like running an office and travel. MEPs get over €4,000 a month in GEA — this adds up to over €40 million a year — but don't have to provide information on how they've spent it. At the time, investigative journalists found over 200 of what they called "ghost offices." A court denied the journalists the information and the lack of transparency and accountability around the GEAs has remained a sore point. Despite repeated scandals, the European Parliament has failed to implement meaningful reforms, Aiossa says. He argues that the institution has done itself lasting damage — first by refusing to respond decisively when issues arose, and then by continuing to tolerate weak accountability and integrity systems. The result, he warns, is a steady erosion of public trust. At the core of the problem lies the structure of parliamentary finances, according to Aiossa. Instead of managing budgets directly, the European Parliament delegates this responsibility to the political groups themselves. Groups are required to conduct annual audits but those are done according to random sampling, which means misuse of funds may not be detected. This means that the responsibility of how party group money is spent lies primarily with its party leadership, particularly its financial officers and secretary general. This, according to Aiossa, has to change. "The parliament needs to take a much more proactive approach in managing this money itself and not delegating that responsibility just to the political groups." German MEP Niclas Herbst, a member of the conservative Christian Democrats, who chairs the Parliament's committee on budgetary control, agrees. "This is taxpayers money and we want it back," he told journalists. He plans to push for criminal charges on this latest case at the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), to show that there must be accountability. Aiossa warns that unless the European Parliament seizes this moment to enact serious reforms, including transparency on allowances, competitive bidding for contracts and direct control over group budgets, public trust in the body will only continue to erode.
DW
13 hours ago
- DW
Can BRICS project unity amid global tensions? – DW – 07/04/2025
The influence of BRICS, a global forum championed by China, Russia, and India, is on the rise. Still, even its major members have to negotiate internal conflicts amid challenges posed by the Trump administration. A two-day summit of the BRICS grouping of emerging economies starts Sunday in Brazil's Rio de Janeiro, as the global forum seeks to build consensus and cohesion after the group expanded over the past two years. BRICS styles itself as a counterweight to western multilateral institutions like the G7, and describes its role as a "political and diplomatic coordination forum" for countries of the Global South. Brazil, which holds the grouping's rotating presidency, is focusing the Rio summit on strengthening Global South cooperation for more inclusive governance. In the run-up to the official conference, negotiators from member states have met to find common ground that will shape discussions on issues like access to vaccines, disease prevention, ethical implementation of artificial intelligence and enabling Global South action on climate change. The leaders of Russia and China, two of the grouping's key members, will not travel to Brazil to attend the 17th BRICS summit. Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely skipping the summit to avoid an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant for war crimes. Russia has said Putin will join via video link. Chinese President Xi Jinping will not attend a BRICS summit for the first time since he became China's leader in 2012. His absence is more of a mystery. China's Foreign Ministry said Premier Li Qiang would represent China, and did not provide a reason as to why Xi is staying behind. The , which first broke news of Xi's absence, cited unnamed Chinese officials that Xi had a "scheduling conflict" and had met Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva twice in the past year. The report included that an exclusive invitation to a state dinner from da Silva to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would also have been bad imaging for Xi. Another possible source of tension is Brazil's decision to not join the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Beijing's keystone global infrastructure financing scheme. China has positioned itself as the vanguard of BRICS expansion and ambition, but Xi's absence at the Brazil summit gives India's Modi the opportunity to take center stage. India is due to take up the BRICS presidency in 2026, and New Delhi is eager to expand on its global diplomatic outreach. Modi's appearance in Brazil is part of a five-nation tour, his longest diplomatic circuit in 10 years, which also includes Trinidad & Tobago, Argentina, and two African countries, Namibia and Ghana. BRICS is a forum where both the Chinese and Indians have been "trying to come to terms with who is a better spokesperson for the Global South," Harsh V. Pant, head of the Strategic Studies Program at the Observer Research Foundation (ORF), a New Delhi-based think tank, told DW. The summit "might give Modi the opportunity to amplify that part of India's foreign policy agenda" and Xi's absence "certainly gives him more space to maneuver," he said. "When BRICS started, it was about emerging powers trying to retain space in the global multilateral economic order. There was an unease with Western dominance of global economic institutions, and India wanted to work with emerging powers. At that point, India believed there was space to work with Russia to balance China. Today, those considerations are up in the air," Pant added. BRICS, originally called "BRIC" after founding members Brazil, Russia, India, China, eventually added an "S" with South Africa in 2010. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates joined in 2024, but the acronym remained the same. Indonesia officially joined earlier this year, bringing the membership to 10 countries. Saudi Arabia has been invited to join, but has held off on formalizing membership. Dozens of other countries have shown interest. Statistically, BRICS countries comprise 40% of the global population, and the share of global GDP at purchasing power parity comes in at more than 35%. However, the grouping has so far found it difficult to turn that potential clout into a viable alternative to Western-led multilateral institutions. Fundamentally, BRICS is more of a loose grouping than a bloc like the EU, or an alliance like NATO. And with more members, finding consensus becomes more complicated. One of BRICS most ambitious undertakings has been the New Development Bank (NBD), a development financing institution founded in 2015 as an alternative to institutions like the World Bank, which Global South countries believe is failing to meet their needs. The NBD has seen some success in funding infrastructure projects in developing countries using local currencies. BRICS is now seeking to build on that track record. A press release from Brazil said the 2025 summit will seek consensus on making the NBD the "main financing agent for industrialization in the Global South." However, the NBD's smaller size makes it unlikely to emerge as a challenger to the World Bank and the global financial system. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Other ideas like a common BRICS currency to counter the US dollar have fallen flat, partly due to China's economic dominance, which would give it an outsized weight over other members. Moreover, internal disagreement persists over issues like Russia's war in Ukraine. A key narrative used to promote BRICS was based on an appeal to legitimizing principles, like the idea of national sovereignty, and non-intervention of countries in another's domestic affairs. "The problem is that you have Russia there, which is now challenging the sovereignty of other countries. You have China there, which is challenging the sovereignty of India and of several other countries in the maritime space," said ORF's Pant. Geopolitical tensions between China and India include a border dispute and China's support for Pakistan during the recent skirmish between Islamabad and New Delhi. There are "divergences between India and China that are quite significant,"Pant said. "China remains uncomfortable with wider issues about India's rise and role in the global hierarchy," according to the Indian expert. BRICS has also notably failed to muster a common response on the string of geopolitical and economic challenges coming from the US, including Donald Trump's threat of tariffs. When Iran, a member of BRICS, was bombed by the US, BRICS members issued a strongly worded joint statement expressing "serious concern" over attacks against "peaceful nuclear installations." But fellow BRICS members Russia and China, which both have partnership agreements with Iran, did not take any substantive action on Tehran's behalf. On Trump's blanket tariffs, BRICS was absent as a cohesive front for negotiation, despite its massive GDP size on paper. "By and large we've seen a very pragmatic approach by all of these countries in engaging with the Trump administration rather than putting up a fight on some grand principles," Pant said. "If you look at the rhetoric and you look at the actual realities on the ground, both the Russians and Chinese at this point are more interested in cutting bilateral deals with Trump. Russians are working with Trump on security architecture in Europe, China is working on a trade deal. Indians are also interested in a bilateral trade deal with the US." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video "On substance, there is not much there as an example of countries that have the potential to push back against the US, because all of them are cutting bilateral deals," he added.
DW
15 hours ago
- DW
EU and Germany push for a new World Trade Organization – DW – 07/04/2025
Brussels and Berlin have launched a new initiative aimed at bypassing the long-standing paralysis of the World Trade Organization (WTO) caused by the United States. But how viable is such a solution? A proposal, introduced by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, has sparked considerable attention. Speaking at the end of a summit of EU leaders in Brussels on June 27, they floated the idea of the EU taking the lead in forming an alternative to the World Trade Organization (WTO), the world trade body that has been in place since 1995. Merz said the idea was in its early stages but could include mechanisms to resolve disputes, as the WTO was meant to do. "You all know that the WTO doesn't work anymore," he said, adding that a "new kind of trade organization" could gradually replace "what we no longer have with the WTO." The German chancellor was referring to the near-total breakdown of the WTO's dispute resolution mechanism. It was former US President Barack Obama who first blocked appointments to the WTO's Appellate Body — its top court for trade disputes — during his later years in office. That blockade has continued under every US administration since, regardless of party affiliation, as successive governments have opposed WTO rulings that they argue undermine US national interests. As a result, trade disputes can no longer be conclusively resolved once a party appeals. Currently, unresolved cases include disputes between the EU and Indonesia over nickel ore exports, rulings on subsidies for aircraft manufacturers Boeing and Airbus, and anti-dumping cases against China. The EU's von der Leyen emphasized plans for a particularly close partnership with like-minded trade nations in Asia, referencing potential cooperation with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). This trade alliance currently includes Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. The United Kingdom has also joined, becoming the first European country in the bloc. But can Europe realistically create a new WTO without US involvement? And how effective would an alliance with like-minded global partners be, especially in the Asia-Pacific? Jürgen Matthes, an international trade policy expert at the Cologne, Germany-based German Economic Institute (IW), expressed support for the initiative in an interview with DW. "A formal EU application to join the CPTPP would be a strategically important move in several respects," Matthes said. "It would send a clear signal to the US that its protectionism is isolating it, while the rest of the world continues to liberalize trade." Matthes also said this would create a "remarkably large trans-regional trade agreement," involving major economies, "with the EU as the largest bloc." "It would cover nearly all continents. And maybe some African countries could be brought on board as well," he added. Such a club, however, would initially exclude China, which Matthes argued is not known for playing by fair competition rules. "The goal is to form a strategic trade alliance that addresses today's pressing issues in global trade — not only US protectionism, but also the massive market distortions caused by China's subsidies, which current WTO rules don't effectively address," said Matthes. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video For the EU, the priority would be to enshrine strict competition rules within the new framework, particularly regarding state-owned enterprises and industrial subsidies. "Anyone who meets those standards can join," he added. That would require China to make major reforms, such as reducing market distortions and subsidies, or finally agreeing to a comprehensive overhaul of WTO rules. Free trade advocates have already created a workaround to the WTO's stalled appeals process called the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA). Formed within the WTO itself, MPIA provides an alternative dispute resolution system that functions without US participation. According to the European Commission, 57 countries, representing 57.6% of global trade, have joined the MPIA, including the UK and all EU member states. Still, business groups such as the Federation of German Wholesale, Foreign Trade and Services (BGA), which represents Germany's export sector, are wary of undermining the WTO. Speaking to news agency Reuters, BGA President Dirk Jandura acknowledged the strategic benefits of forming a new framework among functioning democracies via CPTPP, but warned of the risks. "We must not allow global trade to splinter into competing blocs with different rules," he said. "This new organization must only be a transitional solution, clearly aimed at reforming — not replacing — the WTO." Brussels has also been careful to clarify that the goal is not to render the WTO obsolete. EU Commission President von der Leyen described the "structured cooperation" with CPTPP members as a potential starting point for reshaping the WTO. Even the WTO's former chief economist, Ralph Ossa, who recently returned to the University of Zurich, openly acknowledged the need for change. "Does the WTO need reform? Absolutely," he told DW. Germany's economy ministry echoed that view, with a spokesperson for Minister Katharina Reiche confirming that the German government, together with the European Commission, is actively pushing for WTO reforms. These include new rules to curb industrial subsidies to ensure fair competition, digital trade initiatives, and investment facilitation. The EU is already in talks with countries that support open and rules-based trade — including CPTPP members. The EU's dual message to both the US and China appears to be part of a deliberate communication strategy that has evolved since US President Donald Trump's tariff war. Matthes envisions a new alliance under the banner of "Open Markets with Fair Trade." In such a setup, "the US is out when it comes to open markets, and China is out when it comes to fair trade — unless things change under a new US administration or a reformed China emerges." He sees multiple advantages to this strategy. "We'd achieve more trade liberalization and gain access to new markets. We'd isolate the US more and show Trump that protectionism is ultimately a dead end." At the same time, Europe could send a clear message to China that it will no longer tolerate market distortions, he added.
