Across Europe, tensions are rising as protests mount over economic strain, the costs of living, and concerns about the pace and cost of the ecological transition. Many countries have already registered or are preparing to register demonstrations, arguing that the European Green Deal does not offset the added expenses tied to environmental policies. The following sections summarize the main sources of unrest in Europe’s capitals.
Pressure on Olaf Scholz’s Government
Rural discontent has spread across Germany. In mid-January, a week of protests culminated in thousands of tractor drivers converging on central Berlin. Unlike the farmer protests in France, German demonstrators directed their anger at the federal government led by Olaf Scholz. The spark was a cut in agricultural diesel subsidies, a move tied to commitments to honor the debt brake mandated by constitutional rulings. Diesel aid accounts for a small share of overall subsidies, yet for many small and organic farms, the reductions hit hardest. The changes were felt especially by farms of modest size and those in the liaison sectors between agriculture and related industries. Scholz’s coalition partners, including Social Democrats, faced growing scrutiny as the protest wave persisted in regional pockets. The impact on the broader economy was nuanced, with the strongest effects felt in manufacturing and export sectors. Far-right factions attempted to leverage rural dissatisfaction as a recruiting channel, while major farming organizations remained wary of political entanglement but continued to press the government.
The protests centered around symbolic sites and continued for weeks in various regions, underscoring a broader strain in Germany over policy direction and public investment in the agricultural sector.
The boiling calmed down with concessions
In France, tensions began to ease after the government in Paris offered concessions. The main farming bodies, FNSEA and Young Farmers, announced a temporary suspension of blockades affecting highways, roads, and logistics hubs. The package included a 150 million euro fund for livestock and a pause on certain pesticide reduction measures while discussions on food sovereignty progressed. There was also movement on the diesel tax for rural areas, with the European Commission consenting to reconsider environmental rules aimed at biodiversity protection. The occupation of transportation routes in the Île-de-France region highlighted the scale of disruption, with blockades spreading to other parts of the country. There were reports of disruptions in supply chains and the presence of heavy industrial actions, including large-vehicle movements and targeted sit-ins.
President Emmanuel Macron emphasized France’s stance against certain trade accords, notably Mercosur, and called for a European framework governing relations between large retailers and farmers, drawing inspiration from France’s Egalim laws. He also advocated for a European body to oversee health and agricultural controls to prevent unfair competition. In response, the European Commission signaled a commitment to reducing administrative burdens on farmers, signaling a potential recalibration of EU agricultural policy to address mounting concerns.
Dissatisfaction with the European Union
In Italy, protests spread to multiple regions, with thousands of farmers and ranchers expressing concerns about low wages and rising production costs. The demonstrations featured banners, slogans, and even symbolic coffins to convey frustration with current conditions. A major theme was dissatisfaction with the European Union and the Green Deal, which protesters argue does not sufficiently compensate for the costs of the ecological transition. The Italian government, led by Giorgia Meloni, showed a willingness to engage with protesters and reiterated support for farmers seeking sustainable income and economic resilience. Despite occasional confrontations, most demonstrations remained peaceful, crossing the country from south to north and reaching traditionally left-leaning regions. A new group, Riscatto Agricolo, emerged, criticizing Brussels and established unions while calling for targeted aid, reduced financial pressure on the sector, and protection against imports from non-EU countries that do not meet similar standards.
Change in all 70-year-old agricultural policies
Belgian protests began as localized actions and quickly escalated into a broader mobilization, with thousands of tractors converging on Brussels and surrounding areas. Demonstrators argued that free trade agreements and recent policy changes were eroding local farming viability. The demonstrations led to disruptions around the European Parliament and calls for a major summit of EU leaders. The movement highlighted concerns about competition disruption, ongoing negotiations with Mercosur, and the impact of environmental rules on farmers and agricultural businesses. Critics argued that administrative hurdles and rising fuel costs were squeezing revenues, while some political leaders sought to reassure protesters with promises of support.
Voices emphasized that European agricultural policy, built over seven decades, had created dependencies that made farmers vulnerable to global shifts. Protest leaders warned of continued action if conditions did not improve, while some farmers asserted that future policies should prioritise sustainable livelihoods and fair competition for European produce.
“Lack of protection” against Ukrainian competition
Poland, a largely rural nation, has endured waves of rural protests connected to the influx of Ukrainian agricultural goods. Early restrictions on cross-border transit were debated as authorities sought a balance between supporting nearby farmers and maintaining open trade. The political landscape shifted with new leadership, reviving pro-European sentiment and complicating earlier positions. Farmers in Poland argued that Ukrainian imports, heavily subsidized, distort the market and threaten domestic livelihoods. In parallel, Romania saw protests in a substantial number of regions, with many farmers relying on subsidies to sustain operations. Romania also shared concerns about the competitive pressure from Ukrainian products and acknowledged the financial strain affecting rural communities. Government action focused on targeted subsidies for agricultural fuels and other fiscal supports to stabilize the sector, while the broader political climate kept the issue in the spotlight.
Across these countries, a common thread emerged: farmers feel exposed to external competition and rising costs, while EU-wide policies are viewed as slow to deliver tangible relief. Stakeholders continue to press for policy reforms that protect livelihoods, ensure fair competition within the European market, and align environmental objectives with the financial realities of farming.