Ursula von der Leyen's geopolitics: The US wins, the EU pays

The agreement between Donald Trump, the US President, and Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, on the introduction of a 15% customs tariff on almost all European products imported by the US (except for aluminum and steel for which the 50% tariffs remain in force), although it was announced as a great victory by both parties, in reality represents a stinging defeat for the European Union. This is the second time in the last five years that Ursula von der Leyen has surrendered European interests to the interests of representatives of American industry, if we take into account that the first time this happened when negotiating and concluding the contract for anti-Covid 19 vaccines with Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer.

Although Ursula von der Leyen claims that this is the best possible agreement under the given conditions, the reality is that the European Union is coming out on top even in this "favorable” formula, which temporarily removes the specter of the 30% tariff initially announced by Donald Trump for August 1, 2025. Beyond the apparently life-saving figure of the reduced tariff, the pact hides a series of strategic clauses that require major concessions from Europe and imply huge costs for the economies of the member states. In order for the EU to benefit from this preferential tariff, Ursula von der Leyen has committed, according to the media, to present by August 31 a common legislation on standards of origin, to eliminate non-tariff barriers that affect American companies, and to allow full access for US companies to European public tenders in infrastructure, technology and energy. In parallel, von der Leyen accepted a major energy commitment: the purchase of US liquefied natural gas (LNG) worth $750 billion over the next few years, as a measure of energy security and diversification. In addition, the EU will increase its direct investments in the US economy by $600 billion by 2030, aimed at logistics infrastructure, advanced technology and military-industrial cooperation. The agreement also provides for zero tariffs on certain strategic categories, such as aircraft and spare parts, semiconductors, specialized chemicals and a selective part of agricultural exports. Ursula von der Leyen stressed that these exceptions "reflect a recognition of real economic interdependencies, not just political calculations” and that "this agreement is an instrument of balance, not a temporary truce”. She acknowledged that negotiations with Trump had been difficult and fast, but that both sides "worked for a landing point, not for a head-on collision”.

• China negotiates, European leaders criticize announced agreement

Against the backdrop of the announcement of this agreement, China discreetly resumed tariff talks with the US in Stockholm yesterday, in an attempt to extend the current trade truce by another 90 days and avoid economic isolation. With the agreement practically imposed on the European Union, Donald Trump sent a clear message to Beijing before the resumption of negotiations: the US can conclude solid agreements with its historical partners, generate massive investment commitments and dictate the pace of global economic diplomacy. The fact that the EU has accepted firm conditions and huge financial contributions, totaling over $1.35 trillion, shows that a coherent trade consensus can be rebuilt around America, at a time when China is increasingly losing its natural partners.

The agreement needs the agreement of EU member states to enter into force and be implemented, and some of them have already expressed reluctance about the clarity of the terms for some industrial sectors and for some agri-food products.

However, European leaders have come out in public with cautious but favorable statements. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz described the agreement as "a choice of cooperation over collision”, an act that avoids an unnecessary escalation of transatlantic trade relations. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said it was positive that an agreement had been reached, but noted that until he knew all the details, he could not draw a conclusion on its terms.

French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou said yesterday that Sunday was "a black day” for Europe, which "decided to submit” by signing such a trade agreement. The French opposition has also harshly criticized the conditions accepted by Ursula von der Leyen. Marine Le Pen described the deal as "a political, economic and moral fiasco”, while far-left leader Jean-Luc Melenchon said Europe had "ceded everything to Trump”. For MEP Pierre Jouvet, secretary general of the French Socialist Party, the deal is one of "vassalage”.

• US companies estimate future profits, european companies talk about losses

Reactions were mixed in the US and European industries. US energy, defence and technology companies sent clear signals of support, especially as they will directly benefit from the new market conditions. According to overseas media, ExxonMobil announced a new investment fund for Europe, Lockheed Martin is exploring new opportunities for collaboration with the European defence industry, BlackRock described the agreement as "an anchor for global capital”, while McKinsey forecasted a 0.7% increase in combined US-EU GDP over the next three years. Basically, US investors see this trade agreement as a political signal of a return to stability.

In contrast, German industry reacted with deep concern, pointing out that, although in the short term a direct confrontation and a tariff spiral that could have seriously affected German exports, especially in the automotive sector, was avoided, there are serious doubts about the fair and sustainable nature of the agreement, given that the 15% tariff imposed on European cars exported to the US, reduced from the previously announced level of 27.5%, is still six times higher than the one applied so far, and for the automotive sector this will lead to major losses of competitiveness. According to the daily newspapers Zeit, Welt, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Berliner Zeitung, Der Standard, the German Industry Association (BDI) strongly criticized the agreement, considering that it sends a dangerous signal about the willingness of Europe, and implicitly of Germany, to accept unbalanced compromises. German business leaders have warned that the high tariffs will not only affect the profit margins of exporting companies, but also supply chains and future investments. Similarly, the German Automobile Manufacturers Association (VDA), while acknowledging that an imminent crisis has been averted, has said that the current conditions cannot be accepted as a sustainable basis for transatlantic trade. The German auto industry, already facing profound transformations related to electrification, sustainability requirements and Asian competition, sees the agreement as an additional obstacle in an already complicated economic landscape. At the same time, economists at major European banks have signaled that the deal is deeply asymmetric, favoring the United States and emphasize that, beyond the immediate easing of tensions, the EU has given in on a number of sensitive points, accepting not only higher tariffs but also massive commitments to purchase energy and equipment from the United States, which will entail a reduction in strategic autonomy and increase economic dependence.

There will also be problems for farmers. French wine and spirits exporters feel abandoned, and their reaction has been swift and bitter. According to an analysis published on Vitisphere.com, French farmers and producers denounce the total lack of clarity in the agreement regarding their own tariff situation. Although they were exempted from the 30% tariff announced for August 1, they do not know whether they will be included in the list of zero-duty products or whether they will have to pay 15% on every bottle of wine or cognac exported. The phrase published in the article, "neither clarity nor relief,” perfectly reflects the chronic uncertainty of a sector that has become symbolic of European exports to the US. Ursula von der Leyen acknowledged the ambiguity, noting that "discussions to extend the list of exceptions are ongoing” and that wines could be added "if member states unanimously support this.”

In this equation, producers consider that French vineyards and distilleries seem to have been the bargaining chip in a large-scale agreement. Where airplanes, semiconductors and liquefied gas have received preferential treatment, wine has been lost among the footnotes. A bitter irony for a continent that exports its taste before any other value.

For the European political class, this sectoral silence becomes a credibility test. For business, the agreement is a positive milestone. For those in Champagne and Cognac, it remains a bitter swallow.