MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, May 3rd 2024 - 01:43 UTC

 

 

Lack of ‘tuning’ and a new historic reality, obstacles for EU/Mercosur trade talks

Friday, September 20th 2013 - 08:35 UTC
Full article 10 comments

The lack of ‘tuning’ in trade affairs is not the only motive stalling the decade long Mercosur/European Union trade and cooperation discussions according to EU ambassador in Montevideo, Juan Fernandez Trigo who also included what he described as the ‘new historic reality’. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Conqueror

    There's also the small point that an appreciable number of EU members don't want an agreement with mercosur while it has argieland as a member. Argieland is corrupt, criminal, larcenous, mendacious and untrustworthy. Perhaps mercosur could expel argieland. Mind you, trade agreement or not, still won't buy anything originating in argieland. Or wimpish Uruguay. Or Venezuela.

    Sep 20th, 2013 - 02:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    Looks like Salman Rusdie

    Sep 20th, 2013 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    How does the EU expect to do business with a country like Argentina
    With CFK attitude of banning companies and countries for doing business in the Falkland’s,

    Surely this would be against basic EU rules would it not?
    You can’t have free trade based on CFK rules,
    We will only trade if you don’t trade with ??

    She has to go..

    .

    Sep 20th, 2013 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • MagnusMaster

    Argentina isn't going to sign any FTA the EU definitely not in our current situation, so our pals can either change the Mercosur rules, or disband it. Mercosur was a product of neoliberalism so now that neoliberalism is dead in Argentina it makes sense for Mercosur to die.

    Sep 20th, 2013 - 07:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • The Truth PaTroll

    Europeans like Conqueror and Briton bleeting about untrustworthyness?

    Why can't you two accept Britain and the other European nations are the ones that have broken the MOST treaties in the last 500 years?

    Why are you so cowards as to not admit it?

    Sep 21st, 2013 - 04:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    @5 The Truth PaTroll
    Not really a fair comparison Tobias, when you consider that S. American countries have only existed for 200 years, mass o menus.

    Try looking at it as treaties per decade broken, Argentina will come top of the league, closely followed but some other SA countries.

    However it has to be said, with some European countries close behind. Guess which ones.

    As for the article, I would have thought that with your previously stated isolationist views, you would be opposed to any such trade treaty in the first place, thereby making any question of “deal breaking” redundant.

    Sep 21st, 2013 - 06:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    6 Pugol-H
    i agree with you..

    5 The Truth PaTroll
    you cant have it both ways, you are sounding like CFK..lol.

    Sep 21st, 2013 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @5 I'm sure that you will agree that a “treaty” is an agreement. Want to consider how many agreements argieland has breached? Isn't argieland a signatory to the UN Charter? But you breach that on a daily basis. How about your agreements with your neighbour, Uruguay? How about argieland's failure to arrange the dredging of the Martin Garcia channel? How come Uruguay has been waiting for that, on a daily basis, for more than TEN years? How come CARU's argie component and argieland itself is interfering in the operation of the pulp mills. As argieland has done since 2005. Despite the pollution of the Uruguay River originating from the argie hovels of Gualeguaychú AND argieland losing its case at the ICJ. More daily breaches of an agreement. Argieland breached its own constitution by “expropriating”, i.e. stealing, YPF without prior compensation. There's plenty more. Could mention the Arana-Southern Treaty, the “debt restructuring” scam. We don't “bleat”. Argieland “bleats”, and “whines”, and “whinges”. But the world has wised up. Argieland wanders around brandishing over 40 UNGA resolutions. None of which are relevant as they are all NON-BINDING. AND having started a war that it lost, why can't argieland take note of “uti possidetis”. Argieland started a war. It lost. At the end of the conflict, Britain was in possession of the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. Never mind the prior “history”. As of 1982, all these territories are British. Even after '82, argieland continued its untrustworthy way. Who tore up agreements on oil exploration and fishing? Argieland. Your “country” has spent 200 years PROVING that it is untrustworthy. And when did argieland celebrate its bicentenary? 2010. But the May Revolution of 1810 FAILED. The argie declaration of independence didn't happen until 1816. You can't even be honest about your own history!

    Sep 22nd, 2013 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • The Truth PaTroll

    @8 “uti possidetis” does not apply after 1945.

    What can an utter fool like you teach me about my own history? You don't even know your own!

    @6

    Why is it fair to compare the positives but not the negatives? I still haven't found one SINCERE European, and there's 700 million of you, to admit this.

    When you guys want to discuss positives is your 2000 years of history vs our 200.

    But when it's time to count the skeletons, oh no, then its not fair.

    So immature.

    Sep 22nd, 2013 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    @9 The Truth PaTroll
    There are good and bad aspects to every history on the planet, this is the nature of the history of the world.

    Saying “your history has more massacres than mine” is playground immature. Especially as it is seldom true.

    The simple fact is that in 2000 yrs of history there is more of everything than in 200 yrs. Especially when dealing with a very dynamic history like Europe’s.

    “vs our 200”, a very telling comment since the history of S America is considerably older than that.

    What you are trying to compare is the 200 yrs of European’s history in S. America, with 2000 yrs of European history. I would suggest that they are very similar in many way, but not all.

    I’ll leave you to ponder which of the two has contributed more to the modern world, and in what way.

    Sep 23rd, 2013 - 12:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!