🔗 Share this article

Can European leadership finally stand up to Donald Trump and US big tech? Present inaction goes beyond a legal or economic shortcoming: it represents a ethical failure. This situation throws into question the very foundation of the EU's democratic identity. The central issue is not only the future of firms such as Google or Meta, but the principle that Europe has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

The Path to This Point

To begin, consider the events leading here. During the summer, the EU executive agreed to a one-sided deal with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tariff on European goods to the US. Europe gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the EU also agreed to provide well over $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of energy and military materiel. This arrangement revealed the vulnerability of the EU's reliance on the US.

Less than a month later, the US administration threatened severe new tariffs if Europe implemented its laws against US tech firms on its own soil.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades Brussels has claimed that its market of 450 million rich people gives it significant sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since the US warning, Europe has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been taken. No activation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its primary protection against external coercion.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a fine on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, previously established in US courts, that enabled it to “exploit” its market leadership in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to support European democracy. It aims to undermine it. A recent essay published on the US State Department website, composed in paranoid, inflammatory language similar to Hungarian leadership, charged the EU of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It condemned supposed limitations on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism functions through calculating the degree of the coercion and applying retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments consent, the European Commission could kick US products out of Europe's market, or impose tariffs on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their financial activities and demand reparations as a requirement of re-entry to EU economic space.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of determination. It was created to demonstrate that Europe would never tolerate external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the months leading to the transatlantic agreement, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be used. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are challenging. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should shut down social media “for you”-style systems, that suggest content the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires beholden to foreign interests – should have the freedom to decide for themselves about what they view and share online.

The US administration is pressuring the EU to weaken its digital rulebook. But now especially important, Europe should hold American technology companies responsible for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must hold certain member states accountable for failing to enforce EU online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action is not enough, however. The EU must progressively replace all non-EU “big tech” services and cloud services over the coming years 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 laws are not binding, its governmental bodies not sovereign, its political system not self-determined.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be drawn into that same abyss. Europe must act now, not only to resist US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a free and sovereign entity.

Global Implications

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In North America, South Korea and Japan, democratic nations are watching. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist foreign pressure or surrender 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 model of Lula in Brazil, who confronted US pressure and showed that the way to address a bully is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to issue polite statements, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a better future, it will have effectively surrendered.