EU’s priorities: economic competitiveness or human rights?

Photo by Dusan_Cvetanovic on pixabay.com

The French president Emmanuel Macron, back in February, articulated a new, unified economic strategy for the European Union. Indeed, on February 12, 2026, “EU leaders met for an informal retreat at Alden Biesen to discuss how to deepen the single market, reduce economic dependencies and boost competitiveness”. This was further discussed in March within the European Council, when the EU leaders met and adopted conclusions about several compelling issues: “Ukraine, the Middle East, competitiveness and the single market, European defence and security, migration, multilateralism, strengthening Europe's democratic resilience, protecting children online, the EU's eastern regions and the Dniester river”. 

As far as the economic competitiveness, the “One Europe, One Market” Agenda was launched, to be implemented in 2026 and 2027; the latter includes a series of concrete measures “to boost European competitiveness, enhance the EU’s strategic autonomy and economic security, sustaining Europe's prosperity and social model”. One of the key points of this strategy is simplification. Indeed, “EU leaders encouraged the continuation of ongoing work to simplify rules and reduce administrative burdens at EU, national and regional levels”. The main aim of this strategy is to reduce administrative costs and reporting requirements for EU businesses. 

Yet, this part of the strategy also raised concerns about human rights and their implementation. Indeed, as highlighted by Human Rights Watch, the former seem to be missing from the economic plan.  The human rights group states that “European debates about 'unfair competition' from China often focus on state subsidies or industrial policy”. While it’s true that China has become one of the major industrial powers, at the same time, this happened through systematic violations of human and workers' rights. Indeed, the country bans independent labor unions, arresting and imprisoning those who violate the law. Furthermore, ethnic and religious minorities such as Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims are coerced into forced labor by the authorities, particularly in the Xinjiang province. 

However, wanting to enhance economic competitiveness does not seem directly related to human rights violations or workers’ rights abuses. Nevertheless, in June 2025, the EU’s member States “agreed on a European Council position that, if it becomes law, would hollow out an EU directive on protecting rights in supply chains”. The directive was “Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), designed to protect victims of human rights abuses as well as the environment while creating a level playing field for companies”. It aimed to hold companies legally accountable for human rights and environmental abuses throughout their entire supply chain. The drawback was done in the name of, once again, simplification, and several human rights groups, but also EU agencies, heavily criticised this decision, and urged member States not to weaken the directive. 

While the implementation of human rights and environmental requirements might be perceived as an obstacle to economic development, it is also crucial to ask ourselves what we want to prioritize. In the long term, is it really worth it to jeopardize our legal framework, which protects workers and communities from human rights and environmental abuses, in the name of economic competitiveness? Once the latter is achieved, will we then refocus on people and the environment, or will we, once again, be blinded by the next economic objective?

Human Rights Watch urges the EU to continue embedding human rights “across trade, procurement, migration, and security policies”, not only to secure workers’ rights, but also to avoid “national-security vulnerabilities, reputational damage, and political backlash that has already fueled domestic populism”.

written by Alice Scotti