Opinions
Programmes
Author
Renaud Girard
Renaud Girard is Chief Foreign Correspondent at Le Figaro. An advocate of political realism, he studied at the Ecole Normale Supérieure and the Ecole Nationale d’Administration. He has worked as a war correspondent and written books about the Middle East, geopolitics and international relations.
The date of July 27 2025 will go down in the history of the EU as a black mark, for it is the date of the EU's economic capitulation to America. In this 'customs negotiation' and this 'agreement,' the European Commission's submission to the dictates of the President of the United States was blatant. In both form and substance.
In terms of form, we saw the President of the Commission agree to be treated like a servant by Donald Trump, to leave the territory of the European Union and go to one of his private golf clubs, what's more located in the United Kingdom, a country that decided to give the EU the finger in 2016 and obtained a more favourable customs agreement from America. I believe this is the first time in history that the solemn flag of Europe has found itself in a golf club and been so humiliated. Does Ursula von der Leyen realise that she is sitting in an important seat, once occupied by a man as respectable as Jacques Delors? The most grotesque photo of this meeting is the one where we see her giving a thumbs-up at the same time as Trump and the men in his delegation.
Ms. Von der Leyen would have been forgiven for being so accommodating in form, if she hadn't given up everything in substance.
The reality is that the Commission President signed an unequal agreement. She gave everything and got nothing in return.
The customs duties imposed by America on the EU will increase from 2% to 15%, without any reciprocal measures.
Certainly, some exemptions were granted by Washington, but they only concern products that Americans absolutely need, such as the Dutch ASML machines, which are the only ones in the world capable of producing the latest generation of electronic chips. Shouldn't these products, vital to the American economy, have been used instead to forge a power relationship with Trump, just as the Chinese have built one by threatening America with an embargo on their rare earths?
Trump has always said that the dollar was overvalued and that this was penalising American companies' exports. Since he returned to power, the dollar has fallen by 12.7% against the Euro. A European manufactured product, whether a German automobile or a French perfume, will now enter the American market with a 25% price increase compared to the beginning of 2025. As for American digital services sold on the Old Continent (Google, Netflix, Amazon, etc.), they haven't suffered the slightest price increase. Good for them!
To our misfortune, Ms. von der Leyen didn't just help Donald Trump balance his trade with the European Union. She went much further. She literally threw herself down the slide of economic submission. She promised that Europeans would buy $750 billion worth of American energy within three years. But she did not explain to us the impact this would have on the EU's objectives in terms of energy sovereignty, costs and decarbonisation.
What's extraordinary is that she found a way to go even further. She promised €600 billion in European investments to the United States, apparently during her term. Did we really need 120 days of negotiations for such a pitiful result?
These two promises, made to America on behalf of the European Union by the President of the Commission, raise two concerns in my mind.
The first is the very likely possibility of US sanctions if these commitments are not fulfilled by the European Union.
The Chancellor of Germany (a country that sells a lot of automobiles and capital goods to America) welcomed the Trump Turnberry Golf Agreement, claiming that it would introduce greater stability into transatlantic trade. It is curious that a man as shrewd as Mr. Merz did not consider the possibility of a new round of US sanctions. It is also very curious that the European Commission does not concentrate its efforts on encouraging European investors to invest in... Europe.
My second concern is institutional. By what right does Ms. Von der Leyen make such commitments on our behalf? Isn't she exceeding the powers granted to her by the Lisbon Treaty? Wouldn't she need to read the European treaties during the holidays in order to return to her strict responsibilities?
France has condemned this unequal agreement. Better late than never. But wouldn't it have been preferable if the President of the French Republic had not campaigned in 2024 to reappoint Ms. Von der Leyen, and especially if he hadn't given in to her when she wanted to oust French Commissioner Thierry Breton, known for his uncompromising defence of European interests, particularly in the face of the GAFAM (Big Four) companies?
This blog was originally posted in Chronique internationale du Figaro on Tuesday 29th July 2025.