🔗 Share this article

Can European leadership finally confront the US administration and American tech giants? Present passivity goes beyond a legal or financial shortcoming: it constitutes a ethical collapse. This situation calls into question the bedrock of Europe's democratic identity. The central issue is not merely the fate of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that Europe has the authority to regulate its own online environment according to its own laws.

Background Context

First, let us recount how we got here. During the summer, the European Commission agreed to a one-sided deal with Trump that locked in a ongoing 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also agreed to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of resources and defense equipment. The deal revealed the vulnerability of the EU's dependence on the US.

Soon after, the US administration warned of crushing additional taxes if the EU implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

Over many years Brussels has asserted that its market of 450 million rich people gives it significant sway in international commerce. But in the six weeks since Trump's threat, Europe has taken minimal action. Not a single counter-action has been implemented. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its ultimate shield against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have polite statements and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for established anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that enabled it to “exploit” its market leadership in Europe's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has signaled its goals: it does not aim to strengthen European democracy. It seeks to weaken it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's website, written in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric similar to Hungarian leadership, accused Europe of “an aggressive campaign against democratic values itself”. It condemned supposed limitations on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument works by calculating the extent of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. Provided EU member states agree, the European Commission could kick US goods and services out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and require compensation as a condition of readmittance to Europe's market.

The tool is not merely financial response; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to signal that the EU would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the months preceding the transatlantic agreement, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but did not advocate the mechanism to be activated. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must enforce its regulations, even when they are challenging. In addition to the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style systems, that suggest material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the automated systems of foreign oligarchs beholden to external agendas – should have the freedom to make independent choices about what they see and share online.

Trump is pressuring the EU to water down its digital rulebook. But now especially important, Europe should make American technology companies responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and preying on our children. Brussels must hold certain member states responsible for failing to enforce Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action 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 real danger of this moment is that if Europe does not take immediate action, it will never act again. The more delay occurs, the more profound the erosion of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its laws are not binding, its governmental bodies not sovereign, its political system not self-determined.

When that happens, the path to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If the EU continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to resist US pressure, but to create space for itself to function as a independent and sovereign entity.

Global Implications

And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the rest of the world can see. In North America, Asia and Japan, democracies are watching. They are questioning if the EU, the remaining stronghold of international cooperation, will stand against external influence or yield to it.

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

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to issue polite statements, to levy symbolic penalties, to hope for a improved situation, it will have effectively surrendered.