EU Trade Policy and Conflict

The report argues that while the EU has introduced initiatives to counter conflict resources and provide preferential access to Least Developed Countries, its broader trade policies—specifically agricultural subsidies and the push for reciprocal Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)—can inadvertently drive instability. It highlights the 'double standard' of preaching free trade while subsidising EU farmers and notes that commodity price volatility often undermines security in sub-Saharan Africa. The author suggests that the EU should conduct conflict assessments of trade agreements and reduce agricultural subsidies to better align its trade policy with its peace and development goals.

• The EU has implemented specific initiatives to reduce the trade of resources that fuel conflict, such as the Forest Law, Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) initiative to identify legal timber and the Kimberley Process to stem the trade in conflict diamonds.
• EU agricultural subsidies create an unfair playing field for developing countries, leading to export dumping and lost market shares. In 2003, the EU spent $41 billion on agricultural subsidies, and the sugar industry is cited as a primary example where EU subsidies cost countries like Mozambique ($38 million in 2004) and Malawi ($32 million) significant revenue.
• High volatility and declining prices of primary commodities are linked to increased risks of civil war in low-income countries. For instance, a 25 percent GDP derivation from primary commodity exports increases the risk of civil war to approximately 30 percent, and falling coffee prices in the early 1990s are argued to have partially precipitated the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
• The transition from the Cotonou agreement to Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) is concerning because EPAs require reciprocal market access. This may slash government revenues from import taxes in countries like Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, and Uganda, where trade taxes represent 40% to 49% of total government revenue.
• The EU uses 'carrots' (Preferential Trade Agreements with governance and human rights conditions) and 'sticks' (trade sanctions) to exert influence. While sanctions are described as a 'complex, flawed but indispensable tool', they are often blunt and less effective than 'smart sanctions' or the suspension of development aid.
• The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) aims to secure EU borders through trade agreements and privileged relationships with 16 neighbouring countries, including Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, and several Mediterranean states, to prevent new dividing lines after the 2004 enlargement.

APA

Brown, O. (2005). EU Trade Policy and Conflict. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/security_eu_trade_policy.pdf

Chicago

Brown, Oli. EU Trade Policy and Conflict. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2005. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/security_eu_trade_policy.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Brown |first1=Oli |title=EU Trade Policy and Conflict |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=March 2005 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/security_eu_trade_policy.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{brown2005trade, author = {Brown, Oli}, title = {{EU Trade Policy and Conflict}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2005}, month = mar, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/security_eu_trade_policy.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }