The planned signing of the Mercosur free trade agreement has once again highlighted how politicised international trade has become today. Farmers are protesting, governments are hesitating, and Europe risks becoming internally divided once again at the last minute. As a strategic consultant and supply chain expert, however, I view this debate primarily through a different lens: that of strategic supply and industrial resilience.
From cost optimisation to geopolitical risk management
For thirty years, the focus of supply chain management was mainly on efficiency, cost reduction and just-in-time delivery. That world no longer exists. Geopolitics is now a structural factor in how businesses operate. Sanctions, trade wars, societal pressure and activism have a direct impact on suppliers, transport routes and the availability of raw materials.
Companies are suddenly confronted with questions that would have been unthinkable ten years ago. What if a supplier is publicly linked to a conflict or to human rights violations? What is the impact of a new sanctions package against Russia on my production lines? And what if tensions around Taiwan escalate while all my semiconductors come from there?
Mercosur fits squarely into this reality. This agreement is not only about tariffs or agricultural quotas, but about how Europe chooses to organise its strategic autonomy in an unstable world.
Reducing dependence on China is not just a slogan
For sectors such as chemicals, pharmaceuticals, automotive and energy, access to raw materials such as nickel, copper and aluminium is essential. Today, Europe is to a large extent dependent on China in this respect, directly or indirectly. That is not a comfortable starting position, particularly when economic and political power is increasingly being used as leverage.
Mercosur offers Europe the opportunity to diversify its sources of supply. Not as a miracle solution, but as part of a broader strategy of risk diversification. In supply chain terms, this is known as “dual sourcing” or “multi-sourcing”: avoiding a situation in which a single region or player becomes a choke point. In addition to Mercosur, Europe is also looking to India and Australia for further diversification. This is a necessary move.
The chemical sector as a canary in the coal mine
The Belgian chemical sector perfectly illustrates what is at stake. It is one of the most integrated and interdependent industrial ecosystems in the world. A single disruption in the supply of a basic raw material can trigger a chain reaction affecting dozens of companies.
In such a context, predictability is crucial. Not only price certainty, but also political reliability and access to alternative markets. Trade agreements such as Mercosur create precisely the framework within which companies can plan, invest and manage risks more effectively.
Understanding for agriculture, but a need for balance
Let there be no misunderstanding: the concerns of farmers are real and deserve to be taken seriously. Food sovereignty, fair competition and high standards for the environment and animal welfare are legitimate European priorities. Moreover, research has conclusively shown that globalisation also produces losers. We must not forget them.
At the same time, the debate should not be reduced to a zero-sum game between agriculture and industry. Europe needs both. Without going into their concrete effects, the additional safeguard clauses, mirror measures and extra funding for the Common Agricultural Policy demonstrate that the agreement is not blind to these sensitivities.
The question, therefore, is not whether Mercosur is perfect. The question is whether, in the current geopolitical landscape, it is better to operate with rules, agreements and emergency brakes than to have no framework at all and allow strategic dependencies to spiral further out of control.
Proactivity is no longer a luxury
What concerns me most in this debate is that many companies — and by extension policymakers — still approach geopolitical risks in a reactive way. Action is taken only when a disruption actually occurs. By then, it is often too late.
Mercosur is an opportunity to act proactively. To consciously choose, as Europe and as industry, greater resilience, greater diversification and greater strategic autonomy. Not against anyone, but in the interest of our own economic future.
In that sense, this agreement is less a trade treaty than a stress test for Europe itself. Do we dare to look beyond short-term politics and approach supply chains for what they have become today: an essential component of our geopolitical and economic security?
At Möbius, we see every day how significant the impact of these choices is on companies. Mercosur is not an ideological symbolic dossier. It is a strategic lever. And in today’s world, we cannot afford to let it slip through our fingers.
