🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels ever confront Donald Trump and US big tech? Present lack of response goes beyond a legal or economic failure: it represents a ethical failure. This inaction undermines the very foundation of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not merely the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that Europe has the authority to regulate its own digital space according to its own regulations.

Background Context

To begin, it's important to review how we got here. During the summer, the European Commission accepted a humiliating deal with the US that established a ongoing 15% tax on European goods to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also agreed to direct more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of resources and defense equipment. This arrangement revealed the vulnerability of the EU's dependence on the US.

Less than a month later, the US administration warned of severe new tariffs if the EU implemented its laws against US tech firms on its own soil.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades EU officials has claimed that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable sway in international commerce. But in the six weeks since the US warning, the EU has done little. No counter-action has been implemented. No invocation of the recently created trade defense tool, the so-called “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its ultimate shield against external coercion.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its yearly income for established anticompetitive behaviour, previously established in US courts, that allowed it to “abuse” its market leadership in Europe's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has signaled its goals: it does not aim to strengthen European democracy. It seeks to weaken it. An official publication published on the US State Department website, composed in alarmist, bombastic language reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, accused Europe of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It criticized alleged limitations on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? The EU's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the extent of the coercion and imposing counter-actions. Provided most European governments agree, the EU executive could kick US products out of the EU market, or impose tariffs on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their financial activities and require compensation as a requirement of re-entry to EU economic space.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was designed to signal that the EU would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the period preceding the transatlantic agreement, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be activated. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the last thing that Europe needs. It must implement its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should shut down social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend content the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

The public – not the automated systems of foreign oligarchs beholden to foreign interests – should have the autonomy to decide for themselves about what they view and distribute online.

The US administration is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should hold American technology companies accountable for distorting competition, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. Brussels must hold certain member states accountable for failing to enforce Europe's online regulations on US firms.

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

Risks of Delay

The significant risk of this moment is that if the EU does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the more profound the decline of its confidence in itself. The increasing acceptance that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its regulations are not binding, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its political system not self-determined.

When that occurs, the route to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. Europe must act now, not only to resist US pressure, but to create space for itself to function as a free and sovereign entity.

Global Implications

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and East Asia, democratic nations are observing. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist foreign pressure or yield to it.

They are asking whether representative governments can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who faced down US pressure and showed that the approach to deal with a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if Europe delays, if it continues to issue polite statements, to impose symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.