Written by Marcin Szczepański (3rd edition, updated on 24.11.2022).
It is widely held that geopolitical tensions in the world are on the rise. One of the clear indicators of this phenomenon is the increasing use of economic tools for the pursuit of strategic and geopolitical aims. This can take the form of coercion used by one country against another through restrictions on trade or investment in order to interfere with their sovereign choices. In response to the EU and its Member States becoming the target of deliberate economic coercion in recent years, on 8 December 2021 the Commission published a proposal for the adoption of an anti-coercion instrument that would allow the EU to better respond to such challenges on a global scale.
While the new framework is primarily designed to deter economic coercive action through dialogue and engagement, it also allows – as a last resort –retaliation, with countermeasures comprising a wide range of restrictions related to trade, investment and funding. While there is broad support for creating a legislative tool to address the growing problem of economic coercion, opinions are divided as regards the severity of countermeasures and the manner of establishing when they should be imposed.
Within the European Parliament, the file was assigned to the Committee on International Trade (INTA). The committee adopted its report on 10 October 2022. The European Parliament confirmed the committee’s decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations during its second October 2022 plenary session. Trilogue negotiations are expected to commence shortly.
- November2022: Proposed anti-coercion instrument (3rd edition)
|Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union and its Member States from economic coercion by third countries|
|Committee responsible:||International Trade (INTA)||COM(2021) 775|
|Rapporteur:||Bernd Lange (S&D, Germany)||2021/0406(COD)|
|Shadow rapporteurs:||Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou (EPP, Greece); Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (Renew, France); Reinhard Bütikofer (Greens/EFA, Germany); Roman Haider (ID, Germany);|
Michiel Hoogeveen (ERC, Belgium);
Helmut Scholz (The Left, Germany).
|Ordinary legislative procedure (COD)|
(Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’)
|Next steps expected: Trilogue negotiations|
Be the first to write a comment.