🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels ever confront the US administration and US big tech? Present lack of response is not just a legal or financial shortcoming: it represents a moral collapse. This inaction throws into question the core principles of Europe's political sovereignty. What is at stake is not merely 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 rules.

How We Got Here

First, consider the events leading here. In late July, the European Commission agreed to a humiliating agreement with Trump that locked in a permanent 15% tax on European goods to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the EU also consented to direct more than $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of resources and military materiel. This arrangement exposed the vulnerability of the EU's reliance on the US.

Soon after, the US administration warned of crushing additional taxes if Europe enforced its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

Over many years Brussels has asserted that its market of 450 million rich people gives it unanswerable sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since the US warning, Europe has done little. No counter-action has been implemented. No activation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary shield against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its yearly income for longstanding market abuses, previously established in US courts, that enabled it to “abuse” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to strengthen EU institutions. It aims to undermine it. A recent essay published on the US State Department website, composed in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, accused the EU of “an aggressive campaign against democratic values itself”. It condemned alleged restrictions 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 assessing the degree of the coercion and applying retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments agree, the European Commission could kick US products out of the EU market, or apply tariffs on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their financial activities and require reparations as a condition of readmittance to EU economic space.

The tool is not merely financial response; it is a statement of determination. It was designed to demonstrate that the EU would always resist external pressure. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a paperweight.

Political Divisions

In the months leading to the EU-US trade deal, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be used. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for a softer European line.

A softer line is the last thing that the EU needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should shut down social media “for you”-style algorithms, that suggest material the user has not requested, on European soil until they are proven safe for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

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

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to water down its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should hold American technology companies accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. Brussels must ensure certain member states responsible for failing to enforce Europe's digital rules on US firms.

Regulatory action is not enough, however. The EU must gradually substitute all foreign “major technology” platforms and computing infrastructure over the next decade with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of this moment is that if Europe does not act now, it will become permanently passive. The longer it waits, the more profound the decline 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 lacking autonomy, its democracy not self-determined.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If the EU continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to push back against US pressure, 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 rest of the world can see. In Canada, South Korea and East Asia, democratic nations are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will stand against foreign pressure or surrender to it.

They are asking 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 Trump and showed that the approach to address a bully is to respond firmly.

But if the EU hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose token fines, to anticipate a better future, it will have effectively surrendered.