🔗 Share this article

Can European leadership ever resist the US administration and US big tech? The current inaction is not just a legal or financial shortcoming: it represents a moral collapse. This situation undermines the very foundation of the EU's democratic identity. What is at stake is not merely the future of firms such as Google or Meta, but the principle that the European Union has the right to regulate its own digital space according to its own laws.

How We Got Here

First, let us recount the events leading here. During the summer, the European Commission accepted a one-sided agreement with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tax on European goods to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the commission also consented to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and purchases of energy and military materiel. The deal exposed the fragility of Europe's dependence on the US.

Soon after, the US administration threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU enforced its regulations against American companies on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades EU officials has asserted that its market of 450 million rich people gives it significant sway in trade negotiations. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, Europe has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been implemented. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary protection against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that enabled it to “exploit” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to support European democracy. It seeks to weaken it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's platform, composed in paranoid, bombastic rhetoric similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, accused the EU of “systematic efforts against Western civilization itself”. It criticized supposed limitations on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? Europe's anti-coercion instrument works by calculating the degree of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. Provided most European governments consent, the European Commission could kick US goods and services out of the EU market, or impose tariffs on them. It can remove their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and require reparations as a requirement of readmittance to EU economic space.

The instrument is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was designed to signal that Europe would always resist external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the period leading to the transatlantic agreement, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but did not advocate the instrument to be used. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the last thing that Europe needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, the EU should disable social media “for you”-style algorithms, that suggest material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy.

Comprehensive Approach

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

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to water down its digital rulebook. But now more than ever, Europe should make American technology companies responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must hold certain member states accountable for failing to enforce Europe's digital rules on American companies.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must progressively replace all non-EU “major technology” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with European solutions.

Risks of Delay

The real danger 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 more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its laws are unenforceable, its institutions lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of lies. If the EU continues to remain passive, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. Europe must take immediate steps, not only to push back against Trump, but to create space for itself to function as a free and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the rest of the world can see. In Canada, South Korea and Japan, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the remaining stronghold of liberal multilateralism, will stand against foreign pressure or yield to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who faced down Trump and demonstrated that the way to deal with a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if the EU delays, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to impose token fines, to hope for a improved situation, it will have already lost.