🔗 Share this article

Will European leadership finally confront the US administration and American tech giants? The current passivity goes beyond a regulatory or economic shortcoming: it constitutes a ethical collapse. This inaction throws into question the bedrock of the EU's political sovereignty. What is at stake is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

How We Got Here

First, consider the events leading here. During the summer, the European Commission accepted a humiliating deal with Trump that established a permanent 15% tax on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The indignity was all the greater because the EU also consented to direct more than $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of energy and defense equipment. This arrangement exposed the fragility of Europe's reliance on the US.

Soon after, Trump warned of severe new tariffs if Europe implemented its laws against American companies on its own soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has claimed that its market of 450 million rich people gives it unanswerable sway in trade negotiations. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, Europe has taken minimal action. No counter-action has been taken. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary shield against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its yearly income for longstanding market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “abuse” its dominant position in the EU's advertising market.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has signaled its goals: it no longer seeks to strengthen European democracy. It aims to undermine it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's platform, written in paranoid, bombastic rhetoric similar to Hungarian leadership, charged Europe of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It condemned supposed limitations on authoritarian parties across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

What is to be done? The EU's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the degree of the coercion and applying retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments agree, the EU executive could kick US products out of the EU market, or apply tariffs on them. It can strip their patents and copyrights, block their investments and demand reparations as a condition of readmittance to EU economic space.

The instrument is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to demonstrate that Europe would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a paperweight.

Political Divisions

In the months leading to the transatlantic agreement, several EU states used strong language in public, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that suggest material the user has not requested, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the automated systems of international billionaires serving foreign interests – should have the autonomy to make independent choices about what they view and share online.

The US administration is pressuring the EU to water down its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should hold large US tech firms accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and preying on our children. Brussels must hold Ireland accountable for failing to enforce Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Enforcement is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace all foreign “major technology” services and cloud services over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The significant risk of this moment is that if Europe does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the deeper the erosion of its self-belief in itself. The more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The greater the tendency that its regulations are not binding, its institutions not sovereign, its political system not self-determined.

When that occurs, the route to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If the EU continues to remain passive, it will be drawn into that same decline. Europe 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 North America, Asia and Japan, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the remaining stronghold of liberal multilateralism, will resist external influence or yield to it.

They are inquiring whether representative governments can survive when the leading democratic nation in the world turns its back on them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who confronted Trump and showed that the way to deal with a bully is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy token fines, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have effectively surrendered.