🔗 Share this article

Can European leadership finally resist the US administration and US big tech? The current lack of response is not just a regulatory or financial shortcoming: it represents a moral collapse. This situation calls into question the core principles of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not merely the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to regulate its own digital space according to its own regulations.

The Path to This Point

To begin, it's important to review the events leading here. During the summer, the EU executive accepted a humiliating deal with the US that locked in a permanent 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the EU also consented to provide well over $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of resources and defense equipment. This arrangement revealed the fragility of Europe's reliance on the US.

Less than a month later, Trump threatened severe new tariffs if Europe implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has claimed that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it significant sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has done little. No retaliatory measure has been implemented. No activation of the recently created trade defense tool, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary shield against external coercion.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that enabled it to “abuse” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to support European democracy. It aims to weaken it. A recent essay published on the US Department of State's website, written in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric similar to Hungarian leadership, charged the EU of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It condemned supposed limitations on authoritarian parties across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? Europe's anti-coercion instrument works by assessing the extent of the coercion and imposing counter-actions. If EU member states agree, the EU executive could kick US goods and services out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their investments and demand reparations as a condition of readmittance to Europe's market.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was designed to demonstrate that the EU would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a symbolic object.

Internal Disagreements

In the period leading to the EU-US trade deal, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be activated. Others, including Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for a softer European line.

A softer line is the worst option that Europe needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the trade tool, Europe should shut down social media “for you”-style systems, that suggest material the user has not requested, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires beholden to external agendas – should have the autonomy to decide for themselves about what they view and distribute online.

Trump is pressuring the EU to weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should make American technology companies accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must ensure Ireland accountable for not implementing EU digital rules on US firms.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all non-EU “major technology” services and cloud services over the next decade with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The significant risk of this moment is that if Europe does not act now, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the deeper the decline of its confidence in itself. The increasing acceptance that resistance is futile. The greater the tendency that its laws are not binding, its institutions not sovereign, its democracy dependent.

When that happens, the route to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same decline. Europe must act now, not just to push back against US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a free and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in taking action, it must plant a flag that the rest of the world can see. In North America, Asia and Japan, democracies are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will stand against external influence or surrender to it.

They are inquiring whether democratic institutions can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world turns its back on them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who faced down US pressure and showed that the approach to address a bully is to hit hard.

But if the EU hesitates, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.