Several European Union officials who participated in Sunday’s trade negotiations with the US believe the result was the least bad choice at the block, according to Bloomberg sources

Although the European Commission officially handles the EU commercial issues, the agreement between the head of the Commission Ursula von der Laien and Donald Trump, who predicts that the United States will impose 15% duties on most European imports, was shaped by national governments.

The most important disadvantage faced by EU negotiators throughout the talks was that national governments – and especially the two largest in Berlin and Paris – were not willing to risk the worst in order to cause Trump to make concessions. Von Der Laien herself did little to react and quickly retreated from the original EU goal of pursuing a mutually beneficial and balanced agreement.

EU envoys were informed a week ago that they had virtually two options, either to accept the 15% duties proposed by Trump or to retaliate, according to people who know the discussions.

But the negotiators were warned that in order to make effective retaliation, the block should be ready to remain united.

After all, the EU is weak, one of the sources in Bloomberg said because it is neither united nor has strategic power.

On Sunday, German Chancellor Friedrich Mertz welcomed the deal with the US, saying that the unity of EU members had borne fruit. French Trade Minister Laurent Saint-Martin said on Monday that EU officials would have to return to the negotiating table soon to try to improve the terms of the deal.

National interests

Throughout the negotiations with the US, governments in the EU focused steadily on defending their national interests rather than shaping a strong European position and seeking solutions that would minimize short -term dangers for their basic industries.

On the one hand, this is due to political weaknesses in Germany and France, where both Mertz and President Emmanuel Macron face the threat of the right right. On the other hand, it is also due to prolonged concerns about their dependence on the US and the fear that Trump could respond to trade pressures by reducing support for Ukraine.

Publicly, key governments showed their teeth, but they were looking for ways to calm the US throughout the negotiations.

France pushed to develop the EU forcing average – a wide range tool that would allow the block to hit US and technology companies – and Germany insisted that all the options were open. But in fact, their demands have weakened the EU’s negotiating position.

EU strategy to prevent the US from increasing duties has focused on imports of US products worth almost $ 100 billion.

In April, under the pressure of the Member States, the European Commission agreed not to impose duties on any of these products, according to people who know the process. Some of those involved and some governments have argued that such a measured approach would show good will and contribute to a better result. Other officials believed that the EU is simply weakening its papers.

This pattern in EU relations with the US preceded Trump’s return to the White House. When the EU was negotiating steel duties with the Biden government, the block removed all its countermeasures, while the US maintained some of their duties and similar warnings from some commercial officials within the European Commission were ignored.

This time, committee officials faced a storm of requests from the Member States to remove species from the list of retaliation products, with most demands being led by national concerns rather than a desire to form a compact European position – Champagne and wine.

Berlin followed a similar approach. Mertz has repeatedly called for a quick and simple agreement without clearly defining what this entails and has privately complained to EU officials who “stuck” in the details.

The protection of German automakers was a central issue in Berlin’s demands. A plan drawn up by the automotive industry and promoted by German officials predicted tariff mitigations in exchange for investment on the other side of the Atlantic. If such a mechanism had been adopted, they would be in danger of moving European jobs and investment in the US.

The EU also faced intensive pressure on retaliation by several companies that wished an agreement within the deadline set by Trump.