by EU Aims to Strengthen Its Own Production
The European Union plans to give a powerful boost to local production with the new “Made in Europe” strategy. However, automaker Ford believes there are problematic areas in the details of this plan. The company insists that legislators should ensure the inclusion of the United Kingdom and Turkey in the new industrial policy. Although these countries are not EU members, they remain deeply integrated into the European manufacturing system.
At the beginning of the month, over 1,100 business leaders and CEOs across Europe signed a joint article published in the media of member states, supporting locally manufactured products. This proposal, known as the Industrial Accelerator Act, aims to help the EU compete more effectively with cheap imports from abroad.
Ford’s Caveat Regarding Origin Definition
Shortly after supporting the initiative, President of Ford of Europe Jim Baumbick expressed concern that the definition of “Made in Europe” could prove too narrow if it excludes Turkey and the United Kingdom.
“Ford supports strengthening Europe’s industrial base, but the planned ‘Made in Europe’ rules must remain open to reliable partners such as the UK and Turkey. Our European plants depend on deeply integrated supply chains in the UK and Turkey, and their exclusion would weaken production within the EU itself.”
Turkey and Britain – Key Links in the Chain
Ford views Turkey and the United Kingdom as key parts of its European supply chain, primarily due to large-scale production there. This is not a symbolic presence, but production that directly fuels the entire network.
In the UK, plants in Dagenham and Halewood produce diesel engines, transmissions, and electric powertrains. In Turkey, Ford, together with local partner Koç Holding, operates several factories where models such as the Transit, Transit Custom, and Courier are produced. These are the workhorses of the model range, not niche side projects.
Turkey’s Reaction
Unsurprisingly, Turkish representatives do not want to find themselves outside the scope of the new rules.
“It is clear that Europe is strengthening its own industry. But we cannot accept a scenario in which Turkey, which has been integrated with European industry for 30 years and has strong production capabilities, is excluded by such an approach.”
This discussion is taking place against the backdrop of broader EU efforts to protect its economy and create jobs. However, as Ford’s position shows, modern globalized industry creates a complex web of dependencies. Political borders often do not align with the logic of supply chains that have been formed over decades. The success of any “Made in Europe” strategy may depend on how flexibly it can interpret the very concept of “Europe,” taking into account real economic ties, not just geographical or political affiliation. Including key manufacturing centers such as Turkey and the United Kingdom may not weaken, but on the contrary, strengthen the competitiveness of European industry as a whole.
