EU: in crisis with farmers
Protests and confrontations in different countries give continuity to the crisis with farmers in the European imperialist Bloc. Emergency measures and a bottom exit are required.
By Gérard Florenson
The mobilization of farmers against the catastrophic management of lumpy skin disease in cattle forced the French government to expand vaccination and reverse the policy of systematically culling entire herds as soon as the disease was detected in a single animal.. Macron could have done without this crisis, proving farmers' anger is far from calming, especially because the FNSEA, who stayed away from the demonstrations, couldn't, Thus, help calm tempers as it did in previous mobilizations. This time, Not only did no one ask for permission to block the roads, but they were the two rival unions, the Rural Coordinator and the Peasant Confederation, who jointly and successfully mobilized small and medium farmers, whom the government's decisions and their forced imposition by the police were putting in a catastrophic situation, ruining years of work.
Clashes with police were sometimes violent, but in addition to the fact that peasant demonstrations are usually boisterous, the police had clear orders to use force. This convergence between a progressive union and a reactionary one, with influence from the extreme right, may have been surprising, but it is important to understand that both have something in common that distinguishes them from the FNSEA: They are not controlled by large agroindustrial groups, groups completely indifferent to the fate of small and medium producers as long as the disease does not affect the largest farms. Ultimately, government methods, if they could lead to greater concentration and downward pressure on producer prices, they wouldn't dislike them. But although the FNSEA leadership remained on the sidelines, This was not the universal option of its bases, particularly young farmers, often heavily in debt, who joined forces with other unions. Plunged into a new crisis, Macron and his minority government, with many other concerns, They had to make concessions after demonstrating their incompetence. Peasant mobilization helped limit damage.
The agreement with Mercosur in question
The trade agreement with Mercosur is once again in the spotlight, and on the eve of its ratification. The crisis with farmers was also clearly expressed in Brussels, Belgium, in the vicinity of the European Parliament and Luxembourg Square. Thursday 18 December Belgian farmers blocked the city center with their tractors, They set tires on fire and carried out other actions to express their rejection of the trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur and the new budget proposal of the Community Executive., that proposes a cut to regional and agricultural aid. There were violent clashes and police charges for several hours, with a seriously injured person due to repression.
In France, Macron has declared his opposition to signing the agreement. This puts you in an awkward position., as, except Italy, all other European governments support it. Perhaps it is simply a position intended to avoid an increase in peasant mobilizations, in which this time the FNSEA would participate, a few months before the municipal elections. It can be assumed that a legally admissible initiative by the European institutions would allow Macron to exonerate himself. Whether this would stop the protests is another question., but these would no longer be directed against his government, who would have tried in vain to defend "French agriculture".
Thus, The agricultural issue predominates in the European opposition to the EU-Mercosur agreements. Even in most countries whose governments favor ratification, many farmers feel that they are being sacrificed for the benefit of large industrial and financial groups, who would be the only ones to benefit from the free trade agreement. The fact that Lula and the Brazilian government insist on a quick signing reinforces these concerns.: tomorrow, old Europe will be flooded with cheap agricultural products, competitive because they do not comply with any health standards, environmental or, even less, social.
Great producers, great privileged
It should be noted that these arguments against "unfair competition" are not limited to agreements with MERCOSUR countries.. They are often used to report imports from Morocco, but also within the European Union itself, for example, in France against Spanish products. In fact, if the agreements are implemented, Free trade will create winners and losers on both sides of the Atlantic. a Europe, Large industrial and service groups will find new markets that will allow them to be less dependent on Trump's tariff whims; Y, Of course, “competitiveness” demands will increase concentration, with the elimination of the least efficient, since nation-states must help their capitalists by reducing taxes and "restrictions".
The small textile factory that barely survives in some European province will no longer sell… The small farmer in Brazil or Paraguay will not see any benefits; Will be sacrificed for the sake of productivity, since only the largest farms, often owned by financial groups, will be able to increase production and exports. Thus, also on this front, there will be concentration and the elimination of the "too small". From the perspective of European food manufacturers, What matters most is the cost of raw materials and, not the country where it is produced. further, some have taken the initiative. For several years, SOFT, the main French chicken producer, has moved part of its production to Brazil to be competitive in the Middle East markets. If the agreements prosper, You will be able to sell your chickens produced in Brazil in France! Small Brazilian farmers will not get rich from it.
“Free trade” and protectionism, two policies of the same capitalism
Denouncing free trade and its harmful effects should not lead to defending protectionism or a united front with our capitalists, that are as exploitative and predatory as those of other countries. In fact, both globally and within each nation, capitalists simultaneously compete with each other and work together to cut social and environmental legislation. further, chauvinism quickly manifests itself when the qualities of “our products” are contrasted with the mediocrity of those of our neighbors, and when environmentalism, real or supposed, becomes a mere sales pitch. We support the union of small farmers around the world to fight and defeat those who exploit them, oppress and, sometimes, they murder to steal their land. And these oppressors are the same ones who crush all the workers.
Confront fascist groups
But not all those who want to defend their right to live from their work are aware of this reality.. When the members of the Rural Coordinator who demonstrate demand that they be allowed to work and that their anger is directed against the environmentalists, They do not see that it is Lactalis and other private or fake dairy groups that prevent them from making a living from their work, or if they see it, They don't know how to face them. This is a dangerous situation that could lead to the widespread use of violent actions by fascist groups.. There are numerous historical examples of how the petite bourgeoisie, including sectors of the desperate peasantry, provided militiamen against the labor movement. The fact that some mobilize alongside the "progressives" of the Confédération Paysanne (Peasant Confederation), and that, Thus, even limited common objectives prevail over ideological differences, It should be an opportunity for dialogue, the explanation and attention to the real problems and the necessary solutions.
An emergency program is needed as part of a fundamental exit
The depth of the crisis requires the development of an emergency program, inseparable from a perspective of structural transformation. This program must contemplate, As minimum, the implementation of a guaranteed income, the establishment of minimum prices that effectively cover production costs and ensure a living wage and maximums so that there are no price abuses, as well as the immediate improvement of the working and living conditions of the workers in the sector. To this must be added a moratorium and comprehensive restructuring of operational debts, together with the strengthening of universal social protection and access to free public services, of quality and fully accessible to those most in need. These measures cannot remain in the realm of institutional promises: They can only be conquered through mobilization and independent organization together with the working class., articulated in a common program that unifies the central demands of the different exploited and oppressed sectors.
The open systemic crisis in 2008 has increased social inequality and further concentrated wealth in the hands of a privileged minority. Capitalism demonstrates once again its historical inability to resolve the contradictions between the city and the countryside., as well as to guarantee decent living conditions for the majority. The anarchy of production and distribution, subject to the criterion of profit and not to social needs, aggravates poverty and reproduces structural inequalities. Thus, beyond the governments in power and the current actors, The fundamental solution can only come from the hand of a workers' government, supported by the expropriation of big capital, land and factories, democratic planning of the economy and the construction of a socialist system.
