Connect with us

World

EU lifts bans on Ukrainian grain but Poland and Hungary keep embargo

Published

on

EU lifts bans on Ukrainian grain but Poland and Hungary keep embargo

The European Commission has lifted the temporary bans on Ukrainian grain after Kyiv agreed to tighten control over its agricultural exports.

But the measure failed to satisfy Poland and Hungary, which swiftly announced they would impose their own nationwide prohibitions on a unilateral basis, the very chaotic scenario that Brussels wanted to avoid at all costs.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We will extend this ban despite their disagreement, despite the European Commission’s disagreement,” Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki told a rally on Friday. “We will do it because it is in the interest of the Polish farmer.”

Shortly after, Waldemar Buda, Poland’s minister of economic development, said he had signed a new “national regulation” to keep the trade embargo in place.

“The regulation is indefinite and will enter into force after publication at midnight on 16 September,” Buda said on X, formerly Twitter. “Polish farmers above all!”

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Hungary published a decree to block 24 Ukrainian agricultural products, including grains, vegetables, honey and several types of meat, Reuters reported. The products will be sealed at the border and allowed only transit to other countries.

“Hungary is taking matters into its own hands to safeguard its farmers, and will maintain and expand the import ban within its national jurisdiction,” said a government spokesperson, quoting the agriculture minister.

“Concerns arise that an influx of cheap Ukrainian imports could overwhelm neighbouring EU markets, leaving inadequate storage capacity for the upcoming autumn harvest.”

Speaking from Santiago de Compostela, in northern Spain, European Commission Executive Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis, who is in charge of trade relations and has been personally involved in the negotiations, urged member states to “work along the lines” of the new agreement and “refrain from unliteral measures.”

“What’s important right now is that all countries work in a spirit of compromise and engage constructively,” Dombrovskis said when asked about the Polish reaction.

Advertisement

End-of-week deadline

The temporary prohibitions lifted on Friday were first enacted on 2 May and applied to five European Union states located in Ukraine’s periphery: Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria.

The countries had said the sudden increase in tariff-free, low-cost grain from Ukraine was depressing prices for local farmers after the EU suspended duties on all imports coming from the war-torn nation.

Under the restrictions, four products coming from Ukraine – wheat, maize, rapeseed and sunflower – were allowed to transit through the five Eastern countries but could not stay inside their markets for domestic consumption or storage. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The European Commission had committed to phasing out the bans by 15 September, even if Poland and Hungary had warned they would slap their own restrictions. Warsaw went as far as approving a resolution by the Council of Ministers and posting a video on social media featuring Prime Minister Morawiecki.

“Poland will not allow Ukrainian grain to flood us,” Morawiecki said on Tuesday. “Regardless of what Brussels officials decide, we will not open our borders.”

Under the decision announced on Friday, mere hours before the deadline expired, the temporary bans will be lifted. In return, Ukraine agrees to introduce “legal measures,” such a licensing system, within 30 days to avoid new surges in grain exports, the Commission said in a statement

Advertisement

In the meantime, Ukraine will establish “effective measures” to tighten control over the four agricultural products previously blacklisted under the bans. These actions should prevent “any market distortions” in the neighbouring countries.

Kyiv has until Monday to submit a plan explaining what kind of steps it intends to take to keep their exports in check, the Commission added.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The European Commission will refrain from imposing any restrictions as long as the effective measures by Ukraine are in place and fully working,” the statement said.

Dombrovskis said the market disturbances experienced in spring were no longer present and the prolongation of the bans was therefore not justified.

The restrictions were “exceptional safeguards” and “not something that should be there for an unlimited periods of time,” he said, noting the embargo could be re-instated as an “emergency option” if the situation deteriorates again.

“At the same time, to avoid these market distortions, those export control measures will be taken from the Ukrainian side,” he added.

Advertisement

A long-running saga

Since their introduction, the bans had been a point of deepening friction between Brussels and Kyiv, which considered them to be “unacceptable” and contrary to the spirit of solidarity shown towards the country after Russia launched the full-scale war.

ADVERTISEMENT

Several member states, including Germany, France, the Netherlands and Belgium, had raised “serious concerns” about the detrimental impact the restrictions were having on the single market, which is supposed to function with equal rules for every country.

The European Commission committed to phasing out the embargo by 15 September and working on alternative solutions, such as improving infrastructure and boosting transport capacity through the Danube River, that could somehow alleviate the strain placed on road routes after the collapse of the Black Sea corridor. 

But as the deadline approached, political pressure ratcheted up.

The five Eastern countries vocally pushed for the bans to be extended until the end of the year and possibly blacklist goods “other than cereals and oilseeds.”

Poland, the largest of the group, led the public campaign and adopted an uncompromising attitude, openly threatening the European Commission with imposing a unilateral, nationwide prohibition on Ukrainian cereals after 15 September.

Advertisement

The Polish opposition has been linked to the parliamentary elections of 15 October, as the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) is aiming to attract conservative voters in the countryside. Slovakia is also heading to the polls on 30 September.

“We will extend this ban, this import ban, on a national basis, and this will become a serious fight in Brussels,” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said on Friday morning, denouncing traders for buying “cheaper” Ukrainian grain.

Bulgaria, however, broke ranks with the Eastern coalition and voted this week to remove the restrictions after the deadline, arguing the economic forecasts and indicators no longer predicted severe consequences for the country.

The clash between politics and agriculture has proven a formidable challenge for the European Commission to manage and has been described as a litmus test for the bloc’s steadfast support for Ukraine. 

In the end, the executive chose a middle ground in which a considerable level of control will remain on Ukrainian cereals but under the direct supervision of Kyiv, injecting a sense of shared responsibility into the long-running dispute.

Advertisement

Ahead of the Friday deadline, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his officials have urged Brussels to keep it words and comply with the deadline. 

“This is an example of Ukraine and the EU working together in true unity and trust. When rules are followed and agreements are kept, Europe always wins,” Zelenskyy said on Friday evening in reaction to the announcement.

The president then added a pointed warning against any unliteral move that the Eastern countries might make to stop Ukrainian cereals.

“It is critical that European solidarity now work on a bilateral level. For our neighbors to support Ukraine during times of war,” Zelenskyy said. “Should their decisions violate EU legislation, Ukraine will respond in a civilized manner.”

The Ukrainian government had previously raised the prospect of taking legal action before the World Trade Organization if the prohibitions continued to drag on.

Advertisement

This piece has been updated to include new details and reactions.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

World

Live Updates: Kenyan President Vows to Prevent Violence ‘At Whatever Cost’

Published

on

President Ruto spoke after demonstrators in Nairobi breached the Parliament to protest the passage of a bill raising taxes on many basics. At least five people were killed, according to Amnesty International and several civic organizations.

Continue Reading

World

Ukraine's Zelenskyy replaces military's commander of joint forces

Published

on

Ukraine's Zelenskyy replaces military's commander of joint forces
  • President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced the replacement of Lieutenant-General Yuri Sodol as the commander of the Joint Forces of Ukraine’s Armed Forces.
  • Zelenskyy named Brigadier-General Andriy Hnatov as Sodol’s successor, who will handle strategic planning of operations.
  • Sodol’s removal followed a letter by Bohdan Krotevych, head of Ukraine’s Azov regiment, accusing Sodol of actions leading to military setbacks.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Monday he had replaced the commander of the Joint Forces of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, Lieutenant-General Yuri Sodol, after reports surfaced that he had performed badly in the 28-month-old war against Russia.

Zelenskyy, speaking in his nightly video address, gave no reason for the dismissal. He said Sodol had been replaced by Brigadier-General Andriy Hnatov in the post, which involves strategic planning of operations.

Sodol’s removal, one of a series of personnel changes, followed publication of a letter by the head of Ukraine’s revered Azov regiment, Bohdan Krotevych, in which he alleged that Sodol’s actions had led to serious military setbacks.

RUSSIA BLAMES US AFTER UKRAINIAN ATTACK ON CRIMEA LEAVES SEVERAL DEAD, WOUNDED

In a post on the Telegram messaging app, Krotevych did not identify Sodol by name, but said an unnamed general “has killed more Ukrainian soldiers than any Russian general.”

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaks during an interview in Kyiv, Ukraine, on May 20, 2024. Zelenskyy said on Monday he had replaced the commander of the Joint Forces of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, Lieutenant-General Yuri Sodol, after reports surfaced that he had performed badly in the 28-month-old war against Russia. (REUTERS/Gleb Garanich)

Advertisement

“What I do care about is that combat battalion and brigade commanders are put on trial for losing an observation post, but a general is not put on trial for losing regions, dozens of cities and thousands of soldiers,” Krotevych wrote.

“All the military personnel now understand who I am talking about because 99 percent of the military hate him for what he does.”

The news outlet Ukrainska Pravda, citing a leaked report, said a criminal complaint had been submitted concerning Sodol, who was promoted earlier this year, although it did not identify him. It said Krotevych was willing to testify against him.

Hnatov had served as deputy commander of the southern theater of operations since 2022 and played a leading role in recapturing much of southern Kherson region from Russian invaders.

Advertisement

In the spring of 2023, he commanded the defense of Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine, a town that eventually fell to Russian forces after many months of pitched battles.

Krotevych, in a social media post after the president’s announcement, described Hnatov as a “very worthy officer”.

With Russian forces making gains and slowly advancing through eastern Ukraine in recent months, the military has undergone considerable changes.

The military top commander, Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, was dismissed in February after public differences with Zelenskyy over the conduct of the war.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

A right to drink? Inside the debate to protect US workers against the heat

Published

on

A right to drink? Inside the debate to protect US workers against the heat

Dallas, Texas – More than a decade later, Eva Marroquin’s voice still shakes when she talks about it.

The 51-year-old mother of five had been working construction in Austin, Texas, for about five years when she heard that a friend had died of heat exposure at a worksite. It was 2012, and he had been helping to build a bridge at the intersection of two local highways.

“He just couldn’t get to the water in time,” Marroquin said.

The news shook Marroquin, who had experienced her own close calls with the sweltering temperatures that broil the southern United States in the summertime.

After days of painting walls or cleaning up sites, Marroquin’s face would burn red in the heat. Sometimes, she felt feverish and dizzy. Her throat would even close. It left her with haunting thoughts of what her friend must have lived through in his final moments.

Advertisement

“I distinctly remember how that felt, and it made me want to speak up even more,” Marroquin told Al Jazeera.

Marroquin is among the advocates pushing for greater protections for workers facing extreme temperatures in the US.

The US Department of Health and Human Services found that heat-related deaths overall have been on the rise, as climate change drives temperatures to new heights. In 2023, an estimated 2,302 people died from heat-related conditions, up from 1,722 in 2022 and 1,602 in 2021.

But in the US, there are no federal protections specifically designed to protect workers from environmental heat.

Marroquin and other workplace advocates are lobbying to change that — but in the meantime, state and local governments in the US have been duking it out over the authority to protect workers from the stifling heat.

Advertisement
Employees in Riverwoods, Illinois, work through a heat dome that spread across the midwestern and northeastern United States on June 17 [Nam Y Huh/AP Photo]

A fight between state and local authority

On July 1, a new law comes into effect in Florida that reflects those tensions.

Last summer was the hottest on record in the state, prompting Miami-Dade County to consider an ordinance that would mandate heat safety training, regular breaks and access to water during high-temperature days.

But Florida Governor Ron DeSantis blocked that attempt, signing a law that instead banned local governments from establishing their own workplace safety requirements for heat exposure.

“There was a lot of concern out of one county, Miami-Dade,” DeSantis told local press at the time, warning that the local ordinance would have caused “a lot of problems”.

Florida was the second state in recent months to pass such a law. In 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott also signed what critics called the “Death Star” bill — so named for its ability to destroy local regulations that went beyond existing state mandates.

Advertisement

It, too, prevented municipalities from implementing their own heat safety laws, effectively killing ordinances in areas like Austin and Dallas. Houston and other cities have challenged the law in court.

As in Florida, however, proponents of the law have argued that a patchwork of local regulations would be too cumbersome for companies to navigate. Business groups also warned of “local government overreach”.

“The Texas law is mostly focused on preventing the big municipalities from doing basically anything that might make doing business in Texas inconvenient or location-specific,” said Alison Grinter, a civil rights lawyer in the Dallas metropolitan area.

She explained that the oil and gas industries have long held sway in Texas politics and helped craft the state’s business-friendly reputation. That, in turn, has attracted technology and finance companies to the state as well.

Grinter added that part of the motive for blocking the local ordinances was also political. While the Texas state government is dominated by Republicans, several of its biggest cities — including Houston and Austin — are led by Democrats.

Advertisement

“For culture war purposes, the idea that there are four or five different big oases in the middle of the state that are sanctuaries from all of the reactionary social laws really galls lawmakers,” Grinter said.

Still, only five states have taken it upon themselves to pass heat-exposure protections. They include California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Minnesota.

“The Texas government doesn’t want local laws, but they also don’t want a statewide law,” said Ana Gonzalez of the Texas AFL-CIO, a labour union. “So workers are stuck.”

Governor Ron DeSantis speaks into a microphone in front of a screen that shows his presidential campaign logo.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill this year that bans local governments from passing their own standards for environmental heat safety [File: Michael Dwyer/AP Photo]

Petitioning the federal government

That gridlock on the state and local level has shifted the battle over workplace protections to the federal government.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) mandates that employers implement a workplace safety policy, but it does not indicate how that policy must address heat protection.

That may be changing, though. In 2021, OSHA announced it would start to develop a rule to mitigate the risks of heat-related injuries and deaths for workers, and a spokesperson, Kimberly Darby, told Al Jazeera that this month marked an important step forward.

Advertisement

“Last week, OSHA’s proposed rule was sent to the Office of Management and Budget for review,” Darby said. “We are another step closer to giving workers the protections they need and deserve.”

The proposed rule, however, has yet to be published — and its exact contents are therefore unknown. In addition, new OSHA rules can take years to achieve final approval.

So some advocates are looking to another federal body: the Federal Emergency Management Agency or FEMA.

On June 17, 31 organisations — including immigrants’ rights groups, environmental nonprofits and farmworkers unions — petitioned FEMA (PDF) to provide disaster relief funds for extreme heat, as well as areas affected by wildfire smoke.

It is part of a broader effort to convince the federal government to step in for their local counterparts, according to Will Humble, who signed the petition on behalf of the Arizona Public Health Association, a nonprofit.

Advertisement

“Planning for and saving lives is a state and local responsibility,” Humble told Al Jazeera. “But FEMA really should include heat emergencies in their funding. Many county health departments are understaffed.”

An electronic billboard shows the temperature to be 108 degrees Fahrenheit. Behind the billboard, the skyline of Phoenix, Arizona, is lit by an orange sunset.
Cities like Phoenix, Arizona, reported a record number of days with triple-digit heat last year [File: Matt York/AP Photo]

‘Not seen as human’

In the absence of strong federal action, activists like Christine Bolaños say that employers are left with all the power to decide how to address extreme heat in the workplace, leaving workers at risk.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), at least 600 workers died from heat exposure while working from 2005 to 2021. An additional 43 deaths were documented in 2022 alone.

Experts indicate the actual number is likely higher, as heat-related deaths are difficult to track.

A broad swath of the workforce is at risk, too. The bureau estimates that 33 percent of American employees spend time outdoors as part of their everyday work.

Especially vulnerable are foreign-born Latino labourers, including both legal and undocumented immigrants, who represent a disproportionate number of work-related deaths.

Advertisement

Though these workers make up only 8.2 percent of the workforce, they represent 14 percent of on-the-job fatalities. The bureau also noted that Latino workers make up the majority of the construction and agricultural labour, two industries where heat exposure is an acute risk.

Bolaños — a staff member at the Workers Defense Project, a community organisation that fights for the rights of low-wage immigrant construction workers in Texas — said the heightened risks are part of a pattern of exploitation.

“Immigrant workers are especially prone to wage theft and other violations of their rights, and they’re often not aware of their rights,” said Bolaños.

The lack of heat-related protections, she added, was a reflection of how workplaces perceive these employees.

“Sometimes, they’re not seen as human,” Bolaños said. “They are not valued for their humanity, just what they can produce. Employers forget workers need to drink water. They need shade; they need breaks.”

Advertisement
Representative Greg Casar stands in front of the Capitol dome with fellow demonstrators.
US Representative Greg Casar of Texas has led ‘thirst strikes’ on the steps of the US Capitol [File: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters]

‘The monster is here’

Congressman Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat, believes part of the problem is also scepticism towards climate change itself — and a resistance to addressing its dangers.

“Many of us progressives used to campaign on ‘the climate crisis is coming,’ and we were accused of making up a monster that didn’t exist,” Casar told Al Jazeera.

“Now the monster is here, and the things we’re fighting for have become so basic. We’re arguing over food and housing. We’re arguing over people having the right to a water break.”

Casar has spent years organising demonstrations to showcase the plight of workers — including through “thirst strikes”, where he and others refused to drink for hours, to demonstrate the risks of extreme heat.

At a “thirst strike” last year, Marroquin’s coarse, strong hands clutched a sign that read, “PEOPLE OVER PROFITS”.

Tears flowed from her eyes, which she says have been damaged by the sun and heat. She explained she developed pterygium, a kind of fleshy growth near one of her eyes, from her exposure to hot, dry conditions.

Advertisement

Now, a year later, Marroquin told Al Jazeera she hopes change will come soon. Just this month, she spoke to OSHA about her experience and gave feedback on the forthcoming federal rule.

“It’s really difficult to implement laws about work,” she conceded. “But we have to demand that OSHA implements rules as a whole across construction sites, in the same way they demand scaffolding is built in a certain way.”

But even with a federal standard on the way, advocates and legal experts are wary. Several told Al Jazeera that new OSHA rules are notoriously difficult to pass because of understaffing and a high standard of review, as well as potential legal challenges.

Gonzalez, the advocate from the Texas AFL-CIO, said she was bracing for the mandatory public commenting period for the eventual rule — at which time, she expects corporations to weigh in.

“I’m sure there will be pushback from the state or associations, because the rule will impact all industries,” she said. “But hopefully, this is going to prevent people from dying.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending