🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels finally confront the US administration and US big tech? Present inaction goes beyond a regulatory or financial failure: it represents a moral collapse. This inaction undermines the core principles of Europe's democratic identity. The central issue is not merely the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that Europe has the authority to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

The Path to This Point

To begin, it's important to review the events leading here. In late July, the EU executive accepted a humiliating deal with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tax on European goods to the US. Europe gained no concessions in return. The indignity was compounded because the EU also agreed to direct more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of resources and military materiel. The deal revealed the vulnerability of Europe's reliance on the US.

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

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has asserted that its market of 450 million rich people gives it unanswerable leverage in trade negotiations. But in the six weeks since the US warning, Europe has done little. No counter-action has been taken. No activation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its ultimate shield against external coercion.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, previously established in American legal proceedings, 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 no longer seeks to strengthen EU institutions. It aims to undermine it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's website, written in alarmist, inflammatory language similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged the EU 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.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? Europe's trade defense mechanism works by calculating the extent of the pressure and applying counter-actions. If EU member states consent, the European Commission could kick US products out of the EU market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their patents and copyrights, block their financial activities and require compensation as a condition of re-entry to EU economic space.

The instrument is not merely financial response; it is a statement of political will. It was created to demonstrate that Europe would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is needed most, it remains inactive. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the period preceding the EU-US trade deal, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be used. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for a softer European line.

A softer line is the last thing that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, Europe should shut down social media “recommended”-style systems, that suggest content the user has not requested, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the automated systems of international billionaires beholden to 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 weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should make American technology companies accountable for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. Brussels must ensure Ireland responsible for failing to enforce EU digital rules on American companies.

Enforcement is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace 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 longer it waits, the deeper the erosion of its confidence in itself. The increasing acceptance that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its laws are not binding, its governmental bodies not sovereign, its political system not self-determined.

When that occurs, the route to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If Europe continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same decline. The EU must act now, not just to push back against Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to exist as a free and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In North America, South Korea and Japan, democracies are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the remaining stronghold of international cooperation, will resist external influence or surrender to it.

They are inquiring whether democratic institutions can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Brazilian leadership, who faced down US pressure and demonstrated that the approach to deal with a bully is to respond firmly.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to levy symbolic penalties, to hope for a improved situation, it will have already lost.