🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels ever stand up to the US administration and American tech giants? Present lack of response is not just a legal or financial failure: it represents a moral failure. This situation calls into question the bedrock of the EU's political sovereignty. What is at stake is not merely the fate 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.

How We Got Here

First, it's important to review how we got here. During the summer, the EU executive agreed to a one-sided deal with the US that established a permanent 15% tax on EU exports to the US. Europe gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the commission also agreed to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of energy and military materiel. The deal exposed the fragility of Europe's reliance on the US.

Soon after, the US administration threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU enforced its laws against US tech firms on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

Over many years EU officials has asserted that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it significant leverage in international commerce. But in the six weeks since Trump's threat, Europe has taken minimal action. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No activation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that Brussels once vowed would be its primary protection against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for established market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “abuse” its market leadership in the EU's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to strengthen European democracy. It aims to undermine it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's platform, composed in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, accused the EU of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It criticized alleged restrictions on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the extent of the pressure and imposing retaliatory measures. If most European governments consent, the European Commission could kick US products out of the EU market, or apply tariffs on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their investments and require reparations as a requirement of re-entry to EU economic space.

The instrument is not only economic retaliation; it is a statement of determination. It was designed to signal that Europe would always resist external pressure. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a paperweight.

Political Divisions

In the months preceding the EU-US trade deal, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be used. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the worst option that Europe needs. It must enforce its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, Europe should shut down social media “for you”-style algorithms, that suggest material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democracy.

Comprehensive Approach

Citizens – not the algorithms of foreign oligarchs serving foreign interests – should have the autonomy to make independent choices about what they view and share online.

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its online regulations. But now especially important, Europe should hold large US tech firms responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and preying on our children. EU authorities must ensure certain member states responsible for not implementing EU online regulations on American companies.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all non-EU “major technology” services and computing infrastructure over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

Risks of Delay

The significant risk of this moment is that if the EU does not act now, 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 dependent.

When that occurs, the path to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of lies. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be drawn into that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to push back against Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to exist as a independent and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and Japan, democratic nations are observing. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will stand against foreign pressure or surrender to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world turns its back on them. They also see the example of Lula in Brazil, who faced down US pressure and demonstrated that the way to address a bully is to respond firmly.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose token fines, to hope for a better future, it will have effectively surrendered.