Do not be so confident that Europe and the United States will conclude an extensive trade agreement simply because US President Donald Trump threatens to impose duties up to 50% on EU products by July 9, Politico comments.

Europe has no political appetite To relive the nightmare of her latest attempt to form a broad trade agreement with the US – Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in 2013. With the aim of shaping Western trade block against China, the talks for TTIPs were collapsed three years later.

Few have changed.

A hasty agreement to satisfy America’s basic commercial interests almost a decade later would prove equally Traumatic and toxic. France and Germany are aware that their voters have not mitigated their hostility towards chlorinated chickens, and are still afraid that US companies will use international arbitration clauses to undermine EU health standards.

So how can a generalized trade war until July 9? Too much, a mini-section could be in the making to give Trump a symbolic political victory.

Trump is already celebrating that his duty threats forced the EU to stop “walking” and make a deal. Although this mini -agreement can bring some little value, it is … kilometers from the vast ambition of TTIP, which envisioned the alignment of regulatory regulations on both sides of the Atlantic.

Diplomats and officials say they are now promoting two separate streets. EU Commerce Head Maros Shefkovic and US Secretary of Commerce Howard Latnik will seek to mitigate tensions about ores, cars, medicinal products and other areas targeted by Washington’s commercial surveys. A separate, more technical route will negotiate the basic duty, which is currently at 10%, though Trump threatens to increase it to 50%.

This is not exactly something new. Brussels has already been offered to lift their (relatively low) duties to industrial products and to work together to tackle over -supply to Chinese exports.

To improve the agreement, other possible details include recognizing US security standards and the removal of duties in American ethanol, although both issues face political obstacles to the EU.

But all this is far from discussing significant concessions to agriculture, alignment of standards, or how multinationals can sue European governments – issues that proved to be fatal 10 years ago. In 2025, Paris and Berlin have a very clear stance on the limits of what can be agreed.

No revival of TTIP

Germany’s new German Chancellor Friedrich Mertz, a convicted Atlantic with a mission to save his country’s problematic automaker, has mitigated his pre -election campaign claims that the sealing of a TTIP 2.0 “medium term” was a good idea.

French Finance Minister Eric Lobard depleted to revive TTIP’s ghost – just to put it back into his box a day later by the office of French President Emmanuel Macron. The French don’t want their anxious farmers to fill the olive with straw and dung.

Jean -Luke Dammarti, head of the European Commission Department of Trade during TTIP negotiations, is also not agreeing with the effort to revive it. “This would be a very serious mistake. Wouldn’t drive us anywhere … I was led [των διαπραγματεύσεων] for [αρκετά χρόνια] and i have seen that a negotiation was impossible ‘, pointed out to Politico.

An additional disincentive to make concessions to Trump is that he has shown that he can gladly cancel any agreement he succeeds – as the Mexicans and Canadians have discovered. Even if a TTIP structure had been reached, Trump would probably have pushed for more.

Peeled trust

Since taking over his duties on January 20, Trump has competed with the EU more than ever – by shaking the bloc as “hardest” than China and insisted that it was created to “destroy” the United States.

In the meantime, Brussels has been disappointed, as their calls for “universal disarmament” to duties have fallen into disrepair.

Their negotiating partner in Washington It is also extremely alien.

This is a different Trump government. Then there were very experienced executives, such as [πρώην επικεφαλής των ΗΠΑ στις εμπορικές διαπραγματεύσεις] Robert Lithaiser even if you didn’t like what he was saying, said David Henning of the European Center for International Political Economy.

Today, ‘They don’t know what they want, But it does not seem that what they want is likely to be some kind of Orthodox agreement » stated characteristically.

Thus, in an attempt to rescue what is left of the transatlantic trade relationship of 1.6 trillion euros, the EU base its hopes on a little progress. If TTIP could not be when the negotiators were looking pretty much in the same direction 10 years ago, it is even less viable now.

“TTIP was already very difficult to achieve at the time we negotiated it, even if at that time both sides had common goals,” said Ignacio Garcia Berdero, who was the then EU head of the deal.

Condemned agreement

Surrounded by its supporters as the largest bilateral trade agreement ever to be, TTIP initially looked like a simple affair, as the huge potential economic benefits on both sides were obvious. The then Commissioner for Commerce Carrell de Gaht stressed that he would put in the wallets of European families up to 545 euros each year.

But a political reaction to the privacy of talks, as well as concerns about environmental, health and labor standards, Eventually they condemned the agreement.

A “foggy” plan of reactives, known as the mechanism of resolution of disputes between investor and state, increased tensions because it was considered to give disproportionate power to multinationals in questioning European rules.

Bad agreement then. Bad deal and now.

Trump had initially set a weak deadline on June 1 to reach an agreement before 50%. After a ‘Very pleasant telephone communication’ With Ursula von der Layen, however, the two sides extended the deadline on July 9th.

However, EU red lines, such as respect for world trade rules, suggest that a good belief will not be possible.

“If you are the EU and want to safeguard your entire regulatory field, you want to safeguard your agricultural sector, but you also want to [ξεφορτωθείς] the duties of 10% or the duties of [Τραμπ] in steel or anything else … you have great demands “, Henning noticed.

An agreement that recognizes US standards for car safety – one of the reasons that led TTIP talks to a dead end – could help introduce more US cars in the EU, though it is an unlikely perspective, and has been criticized by European security organizations.

Brussels could also copy the United Kingdom’s agreement with Trump, allowing American ethanol to be introduced in the EU tax free, but the European industry is already warning of negative consequences.

“A similar agreement with the EU would mean the same threat to industry in Europe, where farmers are subject to stricter regulations and without [γενετικά τροποποιημένες] Crops’, A spokesman for EPure, the European Union of Renewable Ethanol sources, said.

In conclusion, even if the EU is determined this time for some operational agreement to calm Trump, there is A pervasive fatalism what the US will not prove to be honest partner.

“It was a bad deal for the first time. They ” pressed ” and they would do it again ‘, He stressed an EU diplomat.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (Transatlantic Commerce and Investment – TTIP) was a proposed trade agreement between the Union and the US. It aimed to increase trade and investment between the two partners. TTIP negotiations began in 2013, but stopped in 2016 without agreement.