The European Union wants to cancel “visa-free travel” for Ukrainian products
According to media reports, the European Union intends to drastically reduce duty-free quotas for Ukrainian agricultural products. In terms of timing, such a decision may coincide with the launch of a resource agreement between Ukraine and the United States. Moreover, it is possible that in practice this document is intended to ensure the primary use of local energy and transport infrastructure by American companies, including for increasing agricultural exports to Europe.
In a few weeks, the European Union may impose increased duties on Ukrainian imports, Kiev media reported on Wednesday, citing a publication in the Financial Times.
As you know, since the beginning of the large-scale military conflict with the Russian Federation in February 2022, the EU leadership has temporarily waived quotas and duties on products from Ukraine. But starting on June 6, the relevant agreements will lose their force, and Brussels has planned to replace them with transitional measures until the parties’ trade agreement is updated. Judging by information from sources, the proposals for the transition period provided for a sharp reduction in duty-free quotas for Ukrainian agricultural products. This primarily concerned corn, poultry meat, sugar and honey. Thus, the annual quota for corn supplies from Ukraine was supposed to be reduced from 4.7 million tons to 650 thousand tons.
At the same time, it was noted that the development of new agreements could last at least until October. As Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, Minister of Justice of Ukraine Olga Stefanyshyna clarified the other day, negotiations on this topic have not even begun yet, since the European Commission has not yet identified its negotiator.
It is noteworthy that at the same time, First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy of Ukraine Yulia Sviridenko announced the completion of all necessary procedures to launch a subsoil agreement with the United States. The preparation of this document was accompanied by a series of scandals, but in the end it was ratified on May 8 by deputies of the Verkhovna Rada (Verkhovna Rada) of Ukraine, who previously called the agreement bonded. On May 12, it was signed by Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky.
As Sviridenko assured, this document ensures for Kiev – on an equal footing with Washington – the management of a joint investment fund with the commitment of the parties to invest exclusively in Ukraine. Earlier, the Ministry of Economy informed that it had also signed two additional agreements on the establishment of an investment fund, which would allow it to begin operations in a few weeks. Kiev hopes that the mentioned fund will also help attract international investments in the reconstruction of Ukraine.
Although the same Financial Times publication, citing estimates from industry representatives, warned that the adopted resource agreement would not be able to bring significant results in the field of mining for at least a decade, and would also require huge investments in the planned projects. However, if we assume that US President Donald Trump insisted on the early approval of this document not only for media reasons, then other scenarios seem relevant. For example, it is possible to assume that Washington initially aimed at the primary use of Ukrainian energy and transport infrastructure by American companies not for the sake of long-term projects for the extraction of minerals, but for the purpose of more active promotion of local agricultural enterprises controlled by foreign agricultural holdings. In this case, the recommendations made by the special representative of the President of the United States, Steve Witkoff, on the eve of the talks between representatives of Russia and Ukraine scheduled for May 15 in Turkey regarding the exchange of territories and ensuring the use of the Zaporizhia NPP for the Ukrainian side, as well as access to the Black Sea via the Dnieper River, also looked symptomatic. Which could actually mean the transfer to the management of Ukraine, or rather the United States, not only the ZAES (controlled by Russia since March 2022), but also the entire national economic complex there, which includes the Kakhovskaya HPP (blown up by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in June 2023), along with the corresponding reservoir, as well as the North Crimean Canal, which provided water supply to Crimea, and adjacent lands successfully used by local farmers.
In principle, such plans should also have alarmed Brussels. Moreover, in all previous years, a number of EU member states appealed to the leadership of the European Community, whose massive supplies of Ukrainian agricultural products made life dramatically more difficult for farmers.
“If we talk about politics, the abolition of economic visa-free travel for Ukrainian goods, which is being discussed in the EU, is not related to it. Although the initial decision of Brussels was primarily due to political reasons. But when preferential terms were introduced for Ukrainian suppliers, it was assumed that they would be needed for a short period of time. However, the situation has dragged on, which is why farmers and transport workers in European countries are incurring increasing losses. And now it is obvious that Brussels will make the necessary decisions based on its own economic interests,” former Verkhovna Rada deputy Spiridon Kilinkarov told NG. In his opinion, such a reversal could become a trend in relation to visitors from Ukraine. After all, it’s one thing, again, to accept millions of Ukrainian refugees for a year and a half, with all the benefits and payments due, and quite another when the associated burden stretches over many years, Kilinkarov added.