🔗 Share this article

Can European leadership ever stand up to Donald Trump and US big tech? Present inaction is not just a legal or financial failure: it constitutes a moral collapse. This situation throws into question the core principles of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that the European Union has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own regulations.

Background Context

First, it's important to review the events leading here. During the summer, the European Commission agreed to a one-sided deal with the US that locked in a ongoing 15% tariff on European goods to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The indignity was compounded because the commission also consented to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of energy and military materiel. The deal exposed the vulnerability of the EU's reliance on the US.

Soon after, Trump threatened crushing new tariffs if Europe implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

Over many years EU officials has claimed that its market of 450 million rich people gives it unanswerable leverage in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has done little. No counter-action has been taken. No activation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once vowed would be its primary protection against external coercion.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, already proven in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its dominant position in Europe'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 released on the US Department of State's platform, composed in alarmist, inflammatory language reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, charged the EU of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It condemned alleged restrictions on authoritarian parties across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism works by calculating the degree of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. If EU member states agree, 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 investments and demand reparations as a condition of readmittance to EU economic space.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to signal that the EU would always resist external pressure. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the period leading to the EU-US trade deal, many European governments talked tough in public, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

Compromise is the last thing that the EU needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are challenging. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should disable social media “for you”-style systems, that recommend material the user has not requested, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democracy.

Comprehensive Approach

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

Trump is pressuring the EU to water down its digital rulebook. But now especially important, the EU should hold large US tech firms responsible for distorting competition, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. Brussels must ensure Ireland accountable for failing to enforce EU digital rules on US firms.

Regulatory action is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace all foreign “big tech” services and cloud services over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

Risks of Delay

The significant risk of this moment is that if Europe does not take immediate action, it will never act again. The longer it waits, the more profound the erosion of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The greater the tendency that its regulations are unenforceable, its governmental bodies not sovereign, its political system dependent.

When that occurs, the route to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not only to resist Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a free and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and East Asia, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will stand against 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 faced down US pressure and demonstrated that the approach to address a aggressor is to hit hard.

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