R16: GREEN TRANSFORMATION OF EU TRADE POLICY

The EU’s trade policy is under enormous pressure to change, and it must change. We are, indeed, facing immense challenges: trade should be contributing to the global efforts against climate change, notably the implementation of the Paris Agreement, but it so far has fallen short, even though there is increasing talk about greening trade; sustainability criteria should be guiding trade, but we can so far see too little progress thereof; the benefits of trade agreements are not distributed fairly between trading partners; the global economy is experiencing massive structural changes; the relative weight of the EU in international trade is shrinking; the world is shifting towards increasing geopolitical tensions, not just between the two superpowers USA and China; globalization is changing its trajectory; trade multilateralism is at a low ebb; the WTO faces gridlock; trade policies have aggravated inequalities within countries; CO2 emissions from global freight transport are set to increase fourfold between 2010 and 2050; 30 percent of global species threats are due to international trade policies; lastly, the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of the Ukraine in February 2022 have exposed the vulnerability of complex global value chains as well as the limitations of the existing intellectual property model. Moreover, the European Union is struggling to conclude and ratify trade deals, as citizens are more involved and concerned about the defence of protective standards long fought for, about human rights and sustainability. Without any doubt, these challenges must lead to a multidimensional paradigm shift of EU trade policy.Without any doubt, our position is not to avoid the worst consequences of a policy based on free trade, but rather to design a trade policy that serves the great environmental, social, democratic and economic challenges of this world. The European trade policy as it stands is not contributing to the Paris agreement and its objective to limit global warming to well below 2°C and as close as possible to 1.5°C. Therefore, the overarching goal of a Green trade policy is to ensure that trade achieves the maximum human well-being for the minimum use of energy and resources. This entails the redesign of the global trade system so that it does not undermine but rather serve the regeneration of ecosystems, while ensuring the possibility of high-quality employment and environmental protection at home and abroad. Such systematic change must be firmly based on a foundation that respects the dignity and rights of all people, including with a clear gender perspective, and is not at the expense of other species with which we share the planet.

The European Commission has fallen short of equipping its free trade agreements (FTAs) with the necessary policy tools to adequately address the socio-economic and sustainability aspects of trade effects; neither has it sufficiently aligned trade policy to its Green Deal. Instead, it holds on to “dinosaur” deals such as the EU-Mercosur agreement and, based on the Trade Policy Review Communication of 2021, falls short in delivering on much needed changes to foster upwards convergence of living standards while respecting the biophysical limits of the Planet in line with the Sustainable Development Goals. Civil Society Organization’s (CSOs) have so far not been involved sufficiently in most trade negotiations and thus, engagement at different stages of FTA implementation must be upgraded. The EU needs put an end to this 20 year-old “dinosaur” trade deal that the agreement with MERCOSUR. Also, its recent trade policy review and current strategy of circumventing several EU member states’ backlashes against its FTAs with more autonomous trade measures is not sufficient to induce the paradigm shift needed. Member states' concerns linked to trade agreements will only grow if the Commission seeks to circumvent much needed democratic debate on the fundamental issues at stake.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure, ensuring effective implementation thereof and making sure that sustainability is streamlined across all relevant chapters entailing concrete implications. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal, the Gender Action Plan III and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. It may imply that for not yet concluded agreements, the Commission presents the feasibility of adjusting the chapters provisionally agreed to comply with the abovementioned criteria and if it concludes that it is not possible under the existing mandate, the Commission should propose to the Council and to the Parliament a new mandate. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal. if at all possible

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal. Possible sanctions may also concern the ban of imports and exports of certain goods and products, especially those directly related to the violation of human rights or environmental objectives and not only the end of preferential tariffs.

The EU needs to address the flaws of trade agreement such as the EU-Mercosur deal by raising the ambition of trade and sustainability (TSD) chapters and ensure effective implementation thereof. The updated standards of the European Green Deal and the EU action plan on human rights and democracy must be key pillars of the TSD chapters. In the future, the EGP will work to further strengthen the EU action plan with regards to human rights in international trade, including FTAs. The recently concluded EU-New Zealand FTA is a good step in this direction. If trade partners don’t live up to their promises agreed in TSD chapters in their trade deals with the EU in a certain time frame, all trade partners should be able to remove tariff preferences. Simultaneously, the trade partners should reward each other when sticking to the agreements in TSD chapters by linking the effective implementation of TSD provisions to a staged implementation of tariff reduction. In case of blatant violations of essential elements of the FTAs (human rights, Paris agreement, etc.), the EU should proactively look for other incentives or consider the suspension of the deal.

In general, sustainability goals shall be structurally included in all chapters of international trade agreements and not be limited to TSD chapters only; for instance, in chapters related to agriculture, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, raw materials, government procurement, institutional provisions or rules of origin. It is essential that social and environmental impact assessments, including on biodiversity, gender and human rights, are conducted and published at the start of negotiations so as to provide to the negotiating parties and the European Parliament projections and highlight recommendations to ensure that trade agreements will not have adverse effects. Impact assessments need to be conducted by independent and competent entities with sufficient resources. ThisAfter consultation of the European Parliament and the relevant stakeholders, this will allow negotiators to determine pre-ratification commitments and identify issues that require special monitoring through ad hoc implementation roadmaps. The methodology used should be published along with the assessment itself as well as a detailed proposal of specific measures to mitigate the identified risks inherent to the trade agreements.

In general, sustainability goals shall be structurally included in all chapters of international trade agreements and not be limited to TSD chapters only; for instance, in chapters related to agriculture, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, raw materials, government procurement, institutional provisions or rules of origin. It is essential that social and environmental impact assessments, including on biodiversity, animal welfare, gender and human rights, are conducted and published at the start of negotiations so as to provide to the negotiating parties and the European Parliament projections and highlight recommendations to ensure that trade agreements will not have adverse effects. Impact assessments need to be conducted by independent and competent entities with sufficient resources. This will allow negotiators to determine pre-ratification commitments and identify issues that require special monitoring through ad hoc implementation roadmaps. The methodology used should be published along with the assessment itself as well as a detailed proposal of specific measures to mitigate the identified risks inherent to the trade agreements.

Trade must be strongly aligned with environmental and climate protection. The Paris Agreement and its legally binding obligations must become an essential element in comprehensive trade and political framework agreements, including those being currently negotiated and already concluded agreements. In light of the potential negative consequences for the effective compliance with the UNFCCC regime, the EU should introduce a hierarchy clause that would make explicit that the trade or investment agreement shall be subject to the obligations under the UNFCCC regime, including the Paris agreement. This approach should also be applied to ensure compliance with other multilateral environmental agreements, including but not limited to the UNEA Global Treaty to Combat Plastics Pollution and the UN Conventions on Biological Diversity and CITES based on a fully-fledged and independent monitoring mechanisms. Moreover, the EU should include concrete steps for emission reduction in trade agreements, such as introducing a carbon price, as was done at the EU-UK TCA. Furthermore, in all animal trade we should follow the guidelines of the UN Goals for Sustainable Development, which consider animal welfare and conservation as undividable parts of sustainable development. Therefore the EU should create an improved regulatory system to govern and control all animal trade, and to protect and prioritize animal welfare.

In order to safeguard the environment, as well as human, animal and plant health, the EU must fully anchor the precautionary principle in the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) chapters of FTAs. For public services the EU most adopt a positive listing approach and exclude ‘ratchet clauses.’ In order to prevent zoonoses the EU should oblige it's member states to legislate, finance and control a regulatory system in order to enhance high animal welfare standards and living conditions.

Equivalence of basic and fundamental standards based on international norms should be included in trade agreements. Complementary to that, the EU should devote existing tools and resources in view of bringing technical and financial assistance to poorer countries to live up to these higher standards. International trade aims to increase the amount of goods and services produced and consumed in the world. Some goods are harmful to the climate, sometimes even in small quantities. These goods and services should therefore be excluded from free trade agreements. The establishment of trade quotas for such products will be necessary to plan the end of their production and consumption.

Equivalence of basic and fundamental standards based on international norms should be included in trade agreements. Complementary to that, the EU should devote existing tools and resources in view of bringing technical and financial assistance to poorer countries to live up to these higher standards. Mirror measures, in particular on agriculture, phytosanitory products, animal welfare and the use of antibiotic, needs to be included in trade agreements so what is forbidden in the EU is mirrored those trade deals and trade deals are not used to undermine EU legislation.

Trade policy must play an active role in requiring and helping trade partners to implement the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) core labour standards and ultimately should lead to upwards convergence of labour rights and standards. Parties must firmly commit to implementing core labour standards.EU trade policy must be based on fully respecting human rights not only in discourse but also in practice, and therefore ratifying and implementing the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) core labor standards should be considered as a minimal requirement for any trade agreement. There is an urgent need to move towards a trade policy that is gender-sensitive. Thus, before starting negotiations on trade agreements, country-specific and sector-specific gender assessments should be carried out. The toolkit developed by the UNCTAD to perform gender-aware ex ante evaluations of trade policies could serve as an example. FTAs should incentivise the ratification and implementation of gender-related ILO conventions.

Trade policy must play an active role in requiring and helping trade partners to implement the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) core labour standards and ultimately should lead to upwards convergence of labour rights and standards. Parties Ratification and implementation of the 8 fundamental ILO conventions must firmly commit to implementing core labour standardsbe a condition before signing an agreement. Afterwards, Failure to comply should result in sanctions such as the provisional suspension of the trade deals and its tariff preferences.There is an urgent need to move towards a trade policy that is gender-sensitive. Thus, before starting negotiations on trade agreements, country-specific and sector-specific gender assessments should be carried out. The toolkit developed by the UNCTAD to perform gender-aware ex ante evaluations of trade policies could serve as an example. FTAs should incentivise the ratification and implementation of gender-related ILO conventions.

In the remit of investment policy, it is investment protection and dispute settlement that have the biggest mismatch with the EU’s overarching policy goals. It is essential that we stop protecting investments in fossil fuels and other harmful activities. Investment policy should focus on incentivising sustainable investments, not on giving special rights to foreign investors. This requires a fundamental change of model for EU bilateral investment treaties as has been proposed by the European Parliament in a report on the Future of EU international investment policy in June 2022. This should be done by effectively preserving the right to regulate of the contracting parties and moreover, we have to abolish the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system and sunset clauses in favour of a system that meets the highest requirements of independent justice and professional judges.

In the remit of investment policy, it is investment protection and dispute settlement that have the biggest mismatch with the EU’s overarching policy goals. It is essential that we stop protecting investments in fossil fuels and other harmful activities. Investment policy should focus on incentivising sustainable investments, not on giving special rights to foreign investors. This requires a fundamental change of model for EU bilateral investment treaties as has been proposed by the European Parliament in a report on the Future of EU international investment policy in June 2022. This should be done by effectively preserving the right to regulate of the contracting parties and moreover, we have to abolish the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system and sunset clauses.

The proposed EU Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence needs to introduce requirements for all companies , including financial institutions and credit export agencies, operating in the EU to take steps to prevent and address human rights and environmental harm at each step of their supplyvalue chains. The legislation should also give victims user-friendly possibility to bring companies to court in Europe when harm occurs. Directors’ duties are an effective tool to ensure companies’ compliance and should be enhanced compared to the Commission’s proposal. All the loopholes and gaps in the Commission’s proposal should be changed in a way that makes it compatible with the European Parliament’s report from March 2021 on due diligence. The EU Commission’s proposal for binding EU-wide rules for deforestation-free supply chains must be improved in order to end the EU’s complicity in the global destruction of nature and violation of human rights. The list of commodities should be more inclusive for products such as rubber and maize; ecosystems like savannahs, wetlands and peatlands should be added from the beginning. The time has come to ban products of modern slavery and child labour from entering the European market. Shirts, shoes, or cars made by enslaved Uyghurs, Turkmen, or forced workers and children from anywhere should not be sold in our shops anymore. We therefore support the proposed new EU instrument that enacts this import ban, but we want to make this an instrument with teeth, by strengthening its legal base and making cooperation among the national competent authorities compulsory. Also, we want to make sure that the affected workers’ situation is remedied as soon as forced labour is proven. The EU also needs to develop tools that aim to eliminate child labour taking into account the socio-economic level of the countries concerned and mixing a trade and development approach. Products must not be cheaper and thus more competitive because they are made from child labour or because rules on climate protection are disregarded.

The proposed EU Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence needs to introduce requirements for all companies , including small and medium enterprises (SME’s), financial institutions and credit export agencies, operating in the EU to take steps to prevent and address human rights and environmental harm at each step of their supplyvalue chains. The legislation should also givepromote adequate access to justice by giving victims user-friendly possibility to bring companies to court in Europe when harm that could have been prevented by adequate due diligence processes occurs. Directors’ duties are an effective tool to ensure companies’ compliance and should be enhanced compared to the Commission’s proposal. All the loopholes and gaps in the Commission’s proposal should be changed in a way that makes it compatible withraises its ambition to the level of the European Parliament’s report from March 2021 on due diligence. The EU Commission’s proposal for binding EU-wide rules for deforestation-free supply chains must be improved in order to end the EU’s complicity in the global destruction of nature and violation of human rights. The list of commodities should be more inclusive for products such as rubber and maize; ecosystems like savannahs, wetlands and peatlands should be added from the beginning and human rights should be better integrated, particularly through instruments protecting customary tenure rights and the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). The timeTime has come to ban products of modern slavery and child labour from entering the European market. Shirts, shoes, or cars made by enslaved Uyghurs, Turkmen, or forced workers and children from anywhere should not be sold in our shops anymore. We therefore support the proposed new EU instrument that enacts this import ban, but we want to make this an instrument with teeth, by strengthening its legal base and making cooperation among the national competent authorities compulsory. Also, we want to make sure that the affected workers’ situation is remedied as soon as forced labour is proven, and that affected or potentially affected workers’ views are taken into account at all stages. The EU also needs to develop tools that aim to eliminate child labour taking into account the socio-economic level of the countries concerned and mixing a trade and development approach. ProductsThis means that accompanying measures must not be cheaperdeveloped to support all stakeholders (workers, trade unions, civil society, SME’s, smallholder farmers, human rights defenders and thus more competitive because they are made fromlocal communities) in order to build their capacity to address the root causes of forced and child labour or because rules on climate protection are disregardedlabor.

The proposed EU Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence needs to introduce requirements for all companies , including financial institutions and credit export agencies, operating in the EU to take steps to prevent and address human rights and environmental harm at each step of their supply chains. The legislation should also give victims user-friendly possibility to bring companies to court in Europe when harm occurs. Directors’ duties are an effective tool to ensure companies’ compliance and should be enhanced compared to the Commission’s proposal. All the loopholes and gaps in the Commission’s proposal should be changed in a way that makes it compatible with the European Parliament’s report from March 2021 on due diligence. The EU Commission’s proposal for binding EU-wide rules for deforestation-free supply chains must be improved in order to end the EU’s complicity in the global destruction of nature and violation of human rights. The list of commodities should be more inclusive for products such as rubber and maize; ecosystems like savannahs, wetlands and peatlands should be added from the beginning. The time has come to ban products of modern slavery and child labour from entering the European market. Shirts, shoes, or cars made by enslaved Uyghurs, Turkmen, or forced workers and children from anywhere should not be sold in our shops anymore. We therefore support the proposed new EU instrument that enacts this import ban, but we want to make this an instrument with teeth, by strengthening its legal base and making cooperation among the national competent authorities compulsory. Also, we want to make sure that the affected workers’ situation is remedied as soon as forced labour is proven. The EU also needs to develop tools that aim to eliminate child labour taking into account the socio-economic level of the countries concerned and mixing a trade and development approach. Products must not be cheaper and thus more competitive because they are made from child labour or because rules on climate protection are disregarded. In the event of non-compliance with the ilo convention, measures to suspend the agreement (end of the preferential tariff) or ban on the trade of certain products will be anticipated in the agreements.

A carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) will serve to address risks of carbon leakage resulting from the Unions climate ambition. In addition to addressing climate-policy effectiveness and compatibility with WTO legislation, account must also be taken of the impact on European trading partners, and, in particular, poor developing countries.

The adoption of mirror clauses, far from reflecting a Green protectionism, would help more healthy and environmentally production methods to the benefit of everyone, Europeans and citizens of our trade partners alike. Complementary to that, the EU should design well-funded schemes in view of bringing technical and financial assistance to poorer countries to live up to these higher standards.

The EU must as a priority engage with international partners in order to restore the WTO, including its Appellate Body. There is a need for fundamental changes in decision making processes and the organisational structure of the WTO; its rules must be updated and modernised and brought up to date with a green transitionand just transition benefiting communities everywhere in the world. The agreement on the “Geneva Package” at the WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022 on a waiver of certain requirements concerning compulsory licensing for COVID-19 vaccines, food safety and agriculture, and WTO reform is an important first step in this direction. The EU should also actively seek to widen the scope of the trilateral forum with Japan and the US on WTO matters by also including other like-minded countries in this discussion.

The EU must as a priority engage with international partners in order to restore the WTO, including its Appellate Body. There is a need for fundamental changes in decision making processes and the organisational structure of the WTO; its rules must be updated and modernised and brought up to date with a green transition. The agreement on the “Geneva Package” at the WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022 on a waiver of certain requirements concerning compulsory licensing for COVID-19 vaccines, food safety and agriculture, and WTO reform is an importanta first step in this direction, but there needs to be a bigger focus on the issues raised by developing countries and communities in the Global South. The EU should also actively seek to widen the scope of the trilateral forum with Japan and the US on WTO matters by also including other like-minded countries in this discussion.

The EU must as a priority engage with international partners in order to restore the WTO, including its Appellate Body. There is a need for fundamental changes in decision making processes and the organisational structure of the WTO; its rules must be updated and modernised and brought up to date with a green transition, international conventions on human rights, as well as social and workers rights. The agreement on the “Geneva Package” at the WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022 on a waiver of certain requirements concerning compulsory licensing for COVID-19 vaccines, food safety and agriculture, and WTO reform is an important first step in this direction. The EU should also actively seek to widen the scope of the trilateral forum with Japan and the US on WTO matters by also including other like-minded countries in this discussion.

Greening the WTO must be a key feature of its modernisation. In this context, the EU should table initiatives in the framework of the EU Commission’s WTO trade and climate initiative early on. Work towards a Health and Trade Treaty should be ramped up in view of achieving a conclusion to the benefit of all citizens, especially in poorer countries.

The EU must end protection of investment in fossil fuels in the context of the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty. As Greens we have called for a modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty in order to align it with the goals of the European Climate Law and the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. In order to do so, we called for the deletion of the provisions protecting foreign investment in fossil fuels. Similarly, we wanted the ISDS provisions to be scrapped or fundamentally reformed and limited. However, the outcome of the negotiation on the modernisation announced in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to protect the energy transition and reduce our dependencies of fossil fuels. Such a system keeps the door open for exploitations, and belongs in the past. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must work towards a coordinated exit of the ECT and the conclusion of a separate agreement to neutralise the sunset clause.The negotiations on the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty concluded in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to give a chance to the energy transition and to the underpinning paradigm shift in line with the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. This Treaty denounced by the IPCC report released in April 2022 is outdated and the EU and its Member States must work on a coordinated exit of the ECT and craft a treaty among themselves to null the sunset clause which lock in our economies in fossil fuel and unproven technologies like carbon capture and storage.

The EU must end protection of investment in fossil fuels in the context of the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty. As Greens we have called for a modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty in order to align it with the goals of the European Climate Law and the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. In order to do so, we called for the deletion of the provisions protecting foreign investment in fossil fuels. Similarly, we wanted the ISDS provisions to be scrapped or fundamentally reformed and limited. However, the outcome of the negotiation on the modernisation announced in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to protect the energy transition and reduce our dependencies of fossil fuels. Such a system keeps the door open for exploitations, and belongs in the past. There is no time to reflect on more changes to the Energy Charter Treaty, there is only time to get out of it. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must work towards a coordinated exit of the ECT, following in the footsteps that some Member States have already done like Germany, France and Spain and the conclusion of a separate agreement to neutralise the sunset clause.

The EU must end protection of investment in fossil fuels in the context of the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty. As Greens we have called for a modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty in order to align it with the goals of the European Climate Law and the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. In order to do so, we called for the deletion of the provisions protecting foreign investment in fossil fuels. Similarly, we wanted the ISDS provisions to be scrapped or fundamentally reformed and limited. However, the outcome of the negotiation on the modernisation announced in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to protect the energy transition and reduce our dependencies of fossil fuels. Such a system keeps the door open for exploitations, and belongs in the past. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must work towards a coordinated exit of the ECT and the conclusion of a separate agreement to neutralise the sunset clause.

The EU must end protection of investment in fossil fuels in the context of the modernisation ofcurrently fostered by the Energy Charter Treaty. As Greens we havehad called for a modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty in order to align it with the goals of the European Climate Law and the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. In order to do so, we called for the deletion of the provisions protecting foreign investment in fossil fuels. Similarly, we wanted the ISDS provisions to be scrapped or fundamentally reformed and limited. However, the outcome of the negotiation on the modernisation announced in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to protect the energy transition and reduce our dependencies of fossil fuels. Such a system keeps the door open for exploitations, and belongs in the past. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must work towards a coordinated exit of the ECT and the conclusion of a separate agreement to neutralise the sunset clause.

The EU must end protection of investment in fossil fuels in the context of the modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty. As Greens we have called for a modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty in order to align it with the goals of the European Climate Law and the UNFCCC Paris Agreement. In order to do so, we called for the deletion of the provisions protecting foreign investment in fossil fuels. Similarly, we wanted the ISDS provisions to be scrapped or fundamentally reformed and limited. However, the outcome of the negotiation on the modernisation announced in June 2022 falls short of what is needed to protect the energy transition and reduce our dependencies of fossil fuels. Such a system keeps the door open for exploitations, and belongs in the past. Therefore, the EU and its Member States must work towards a coordinated exit of the ECT and the conclusion of a separate agreement to neutralise the sunset clause.

Transfer of climate friendly technologies and essential health technologies from the global north to the global south must be supported in a manner that fosters the development of local economies and local resilience. The EU must also engage in a rebalancing of the global system of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in order to foster the legal transfer of climate-friendly technology. For instance, this should include the promotion of a declaration on “IPR and Climate Change” at the WTO, encouraging technology transfer and the use of compulsory licensing of key climate technologies. The WTO should also encourage technology transfer and the use of compulsory licensing of key technologies in the field of health. The TRIPS Agreement should be amended to allow WTO members to exclude key climate technologies from patent protection with a view to fighting a pandemic. Besides, the possibility to distinguish products according to their process and production methods needs to be pushed forward.

The Covid-19 pandemic and the impact of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine on the global economy have exposed the vulnerability of complex global value chains and the need for a resilient economy based on sobriety, low-tech and a circular economy where possible. The EU must address its supply chain ruptures by putting in place a resilience stress test for its industrial sector to identify raw materials within the recently announced European Critical Raw Materials Act, industrial goods, medical products, and food commodities which are facing a high risk of supply disruption with cascade effects on the EU’s economy and foster predictability and trade diversification. On the way towards more resilience, the EU must build reliable supply chains with like-minded partner countries (friend-shoring), in particular with regard to critical infrastructure, e.g. medical equipment and semi-conductors. The EU’s upgrade of the High-Level Economic Dialogue with Taiwan is a step in the right direction. Pursuing closer alliances with ASEAN, African or EU-neighboring countries, including Switzerland, would be necessary next steps.

Furthermore, mechanisms could be developed to limit countries and powerful industries with superior access, from controlling a disproportionate share of the global strategic resources, such as rare earth minerals, needed for global green transition. A special attention should be paid to the rights of local communities who will have to have a say in the exploitation of the resource pursuant to the UN Free, Prior, Informed consent principle and be financially rewarded for the exploitation of the resource and, when needed, compensated for the negative adverse impacts.

Furthermore, mechanisms could be developed to limit countries and powerful industries with superior access, from controlling a disproportionate share of the global strategic resources, such as rare earth minerals, needed for global green transition. E.g. Powerful and highly influential car industies in Europe and the USA are currently in the process of converting the massive private car fleet into an electric fleet, with the intention to control and dominate the supply chains of these critical materials. Without the development of limiting mechanisms, there is a real danger that the car industry will purchase the majority of those critical and rare metals that are needed to to develop the basic energy and IT-infrastructure of countries suffering most from climate change, while wealthy western car owners enjoy their greenwashed cars, thus replicating the neocolonial exclusion of the most affected peoples.

Closed material loops and shorter supply chains would lead to less dependency on raw material imports and less waste export and thus contribute to the EU’s supply chain resilience. It is therefore crucial that we ensure that trade and investment agreements do not contradict circular economy policies. We must provide carve-outs in trade agreements for relevant EU legislation on circular economy from the notion of trade barrier, as well as stronger and adequate legal environmental safeguards. In addition, increased recycling can reduce the EU’s reliance on imports of raw materials.

Trade agreements cannot be concluded at any cost. In the spirit of the resolution adopted at the 35th EGP Council in Riga (2022) on the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe, stringent and enforceable provisions must guarantee that they will benefit everyone in the societies of the trade partners. Concretely, it means that the right to regulate will be preserved, the precautionary principle will be mentioned in the sanitary and phytosanitary principle, a hierarchy clause will specify that trade rules will not squeeze those ensuring the sustainability of the agreements or the ecological transition of our economies like the Paris agreement and the CBD. Also, hardcore negotiations will be allowed to start unless a sustainability impact assessments has been carried out as described above. In case of a persistent refusal of the implementation roadmap by the future trade partners, the negotiations will be suspended or terminated. Greens in the EP, the national Parliaments and in governments will ensure the respect of these safeguards.