Open for Business, Closed for Blindness

Last week’s meeting between Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever and the leadership of Nyrstar and Trafigura may have followed a familiar script, but it exposes a deeper contradiction. As Europe frames critical raw materials as a matter of sovereignty, it continues to engage companies whose control and accountability lie beyond its jurisdiction. The real question is how far European countries are willing to accommodate actors in strategic industries that remain reputationally contested. De Wever receives these leaders in recognition of their importance, but unlike Donald Trump, it is highly unlikely he would turn a blind eye to the trade-offs involved.

A Routine Encounter, A European Dilemma

When Bart De Wever declared before the United Nations that Belgium is “open for business, but closed for crime”, it struck a chord well beyond diplomatic circles. It was a statement of intent, a line drawn between economic openness and ethical boundaries. Yet the distinction is less clear than it appears.

The Prime Minister’s recent meeting with Nyrstar and Trafigura was, on the surface, routine. Governments regularly engage with major industrial players, particularly those that anchor strategic sectors. Both Nyrstar and Trafigura play a central role in securing critical raw materials that are vital to Europe’s energy transition and industrial resilience. But this strategic importance sits uneasily alongside a more troubling reality. Europe has, in effect, relinquished direct control over one of its key industrial assets.

Nyrstar, once a Belgian listed company operating under European oversight, is now fully controlled by Singapore based Trafigura following a highly contested and allegedly unlawful restructuring. The contradiction is hard to ignore: at the very moment Europe identifies critical minerals as essential to its sovereignty, ownership of a major player in that field has shifted beyond its immediate reach.

Trump’s Deals versus De Wever’s Diplomacy

To his credit, Bart De Wever is right to engage with key industrial actors, including Nyrstar and Trafigura. Yet it is widely understood that such corporations do not seek access to the highest levels of government without advancing specific interests and agendas. Beyond the formalities and photographs lies a quieter, less transparent process in which policy is shaped, regulatory boundaries are tested, and influence is carefully exercised.

Not surprisingly, Trafigura was among the early commodity traders to position itself for renewed business linked to Venezuelan oil, pursuing opaque deals with Washington. Donald Trump has shown little hesitation in engaging with a company known for repeated controversies, with limited effort to disguise the interests at play. 

The Belgian Prime Minister operates on a different register. Known for his strategic discipline and in-depth knowledge of complex dossiers, he approaches such relationships with a more calibrated method, a quality that has earned him credibility among European counterparts. From a diplomatic standpoint, he may engage with Nyrstar and Trafigura, recognising their importance in global supply chains. But that should not be mistaken for overlooking ethical concerns or yielding to lobbying efforts.

It would be instructive to review the policy paper outlining the concrete requests submitted by Nyrstar and Trafigura to the Prime Minister. That said, the latter is unlikely to be naïve about the context in which these companies engage political leaders. De Wever is well aware that the transfer of Nyrstar’s assets remains under criminal investigation in Belgium, just as he is fully briefed, no doubt, on Trafigura’s global track record, which spans convictions for bribery and numerous allegations of fraud and misconduct.

Sustainability Between Promise and Practice

As the Prime Minister rightly noted, both Nyrstar and Trafigura are pivotal to Europe’s transition towards a more sustainable economy. The materials they produce are indispensable for renewable technologies and the broader shift away from fossil fuels. Yet their contribution appears driven first and foremost by commercial incentives, rather than by a consistent commitment to environmental stewardship.

The divergence between ESG policy on paper and practice on the ground is difficult to reconcile. Recent developments illustrate this gap with particular clarity. Pollution linked to Nyrstar’s activities in Pelt has downstream consequences in the Netherlands, a reality Bart De Wever knows all too well, as Dutch water authorities have been compelled to resort to legal action to defend water quality and public health standards.

This duality lies at the heart of the dilemma. Europe needs these industries, not only for economic reasons but also to deliver on its climate ambitions. At the same time, it must ensure that their operations reflect the very ESG standards that define the European model of governance.

The Real Test of “Open for Business”

Prime Minister De Wever’s statement at the United Nations was not misplaced. If anything, it set a necessary benchmark. But a benchmark only holds value if it is consistently applied. Being open for business must not become a licence for selective blindness, where strategic importance overshadows fundamental principles.

If Europe is to lead in both industry and integrity, it must ensure that its partnerships reflect not only its ambitions but also its values. That requires not only engagement, but discernment. Otherwise, “open for business” risks becoming less a statement of strength and more an invitation to the very practices it claims to exclude.

Go to original article