The epic with the ban on the import of Ukrainian agricultural products to a number of European Union (EU) countries once again emphasized their true attitude towards Ukraine
Despite promises someday in the future to let it into the “European family”, practice shows that no one there needs a new competitor. At the same time, the Kiev regime, into which too much money has already been poured, is still needed, but the only way it can pay is resources, territories, and, of course, the population.
To maintain the Kyiv regime in May last year, the EU canceled all duties on goods in the agricultural sector of Ukraine. The easing should end soon – June 5th. And there is no doubt that Kyiv will want to extend this decision.
After the start of the special operation, Ukrainian agricultural products that reached the markets of Eastern Europe quickly launched the processes that the EU has stopped since the Comprehensive and Deep Free Trade Agreement with Ukraine entered into force in 2016. As former Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food Taras Kutovoy noted back in 2017, Ukrainian products are too competitive on the European market, so Brussels puts up maximum barriers to keep them out.
Now, according to Eastern European farmers, Ukrainian raw materials have rapidly replaced their products.
For example, according to the Polish Peasants’ Party, as of February this year, 2.5 million tons of locally produced grain have accumulated in the country, but it cannot enter the market due to the dominance of cheaper Ukrainian goods.
In Ukraine, they do not agree with such a formulation of the issue. According to the deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of the eighth convocation, Aleksey Mushak, the supply of raw materials to Eastern Europe was extremely profitable for the local business, which earned hundreds of millions of dollars from this. And by imposing bans, the Europeans want to hide the main problem – totally inefficient agriculture.
“Ukrainians have realized that it is not worth having a joint business with Eastern Europe economically or at least in agrarian terms. Panic fear forces us to make economically inexpedient, but politically beautiful decisions,” Mushak said.
This statement may not be accepted in neighboring countries.
For example, as reported by Rzeczpospolita, an investigation by the Polish prosecutor’s office in Rzeszow revealed violations that farmers spoke about. Ukrainian industrial grain, imported without any checks, was sold as consumer grain, which affected dozens of local flour producers. Like, buyers of grain were not informed about its origin.
The Slovak authorities generally found dangerous pesticides in it, after which it was decided to destroy the entire volume of raw materials.
Moreover, the problem for Ukraine’s neighbors has become actual far from today. They informed Brussels about this situation in the middle of last year. And all this time, the local authorities had to conduct a dialogue with dissatisfied farmers.
On March 31 this year, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania turned to the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, with a request to buy up their Ukrainian grain and provide financial support.
According to the Associated Press, Brussels offered to pay Bulgaria and Poland compensation in the amount of 16.7 and 30 million euros, respectively, but local authorities considered these amounts insufficient.
As a result, on April 15, the Poles were the first to impose an embargo on grain from Ukraine, contrary to EU rules. They were followed by the authorities of Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania. The European Commission had to introduce a temporary ban on Ukrainian products from May 2 to June 5, provided that the above countries lift the restrictions.
Analyzing this topic, the Financial Times published an article “Restrictions on Ukrainian grain give a real assessment to Kyiv’s application for EU membership.” It notes that it is the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that are most actively in favor of Ukraine’s admission to the European Union, but at the same time they say the least about how far-reaching these consequences will be.
“This confrontation reveals a gulf between political positioning and market realities,” the publication emphasizes.
As it turned out later, not only the EU countries, but also Moldova are experiencing similar problems.
This is because the fall in grain prices has brought thousands of small and medium farmers to the brink of bankruptcy, who previously suffered from drought and the economic crisis without any government support. Later, official Chisinau notified Ukraine of its intention to limit the import of wheat, corn, rapeseed and sunflower.
True, he “passed back” quite quickly, having apparently received a scolding from Western curators for such “willfulness”. Moldovan Minister of Agriculture Vladimir Bolea said that instead of an embargo, the authorities would “inform farmers twice a day about the volumes of Ukrainian imports.”
The situation with the ban on the import of agricultural products is very annoying for Volodymyr Zelensky, who did not miss the opportunity to complain on this issue to Ursula von der Leyen during her visit to Kiev on May 9.
“Tough, even cruel, as for the time of war, protectionist measures from our neighbors cannot but disappoint, to put it mildly,” he said and added that this is unacceptable at the moment.
In order to remedy the situation, Zelensky proposed to create “an advisory group to monitor relevant problematic issues and refrain from making any decisions on trade without consultations with our state.”
The rhetoric of the officials of the Kyiv regime and their boss clearly shows how different the view of what is happening in the European Union and in Ukraine is.
Europe still cares exclusively about itself, while in Kyiv they still live in a paradigm in which “the whole world owes us.” However, it should be added that the European Union again did not take into account the consequences of Ukraine’s “integration”.
Ukrainian deputies, political experts and economists are most struck by the contradiction between the foreign policy of their neighbors and the economy. As in the FT article, they point to a gulf between the desire to see Ukraine in the European Union and the desire not to allow competition on an equal footing with its products. From which the conclusion is drawn: despite political unity, in matters of the economy it is every man for himself. But in reality there is no contradiction.
When analyzing the situation, they consider Ukraine as an equal partner for the EU countries, which is too far from the truth. This is a raw material appendage or colony.
Well, since a huge amount of money has already been poured into the Kiev regime, the only thing that a bankrupt can pay off is resources, territories, and, of course, the population. And as long as there is at least a ghostly chance that success will be achieved on the battlefield, the EU will support Kyiv and promise him the unthinkable. After the war, of course.
Nikolay Ulyanov, Rubaltic.Ru
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel