🔗 Share this article

Will European leadership finally resist Donald Trump and US big tech? Present inaction goes beyond a regulatory or economic shortcoming: it constitutes a moral collapse. This situation undermines the core principles of the EU's political sovereignty. 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 online environment according to its own regulations.

The Path to This Point

First, it's important to review how we got here. During the summer, the EU executive accepted a one-sided agreement with the US that locked in a ongoing 15% tax on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The indignity was compounded because the commission also consented to provide well over $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of energy and defense equipment. The deal exposed the fragility of the EU's dependence on the US.

Soon after, Trump warned of severe new tariffs if Europe enforced its regulations against US tech firms on its own soil.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades EU officials has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million affluent people gives it significant leverage in international commerce. But in the month and a half since the US warning, the EU has done little. Not a single counter-action has been taken. No activation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that Brussels once vowed would be its ultimate shield against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, previously established in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “exploit” its dominant position in the EU's advertising market.

American Strategy

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to support European democracy. It aims to undermine it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's website, written in paranoid, bombastic language reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, accused Europe of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It condemned supposed limitations on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? The EU's trade defense mechanism works by calculating the degree of the coercion and imposing counter-actions. If most European governments agree, the European Commission could kick US goods and services out of the EU market, or apply tariffs on them. It can remove their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and demand compensation as a condition of re-entry to EU economic space.

The tool is not merely financial response; it is a statement of determination. It was created to signal that the EU 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 months preceding the transatlantic agreement, several EU states talked tough in public, but failed to push for the mechanism to be used. Others, including Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

A softer line is the worst option that the EU needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are challenging. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should shut down social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that suggest content the user has not requested, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

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

The US administration is putting Europe under pressure to water down its online regulations. But now especially important, Europe should hold American technology companies accountable for distorting competition, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. Brussels must ensure certain member states accountable for not implementing Europe's online regulations on American companies.

Enforcement is not enough, however. Europe must gradually substitute all foreign “big tech” services and computing infrastructure over the next decade with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of this moment is that if the EU does not act now, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the more profound the decline of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its regulations are unenforceable, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same decline. Europe must act now, not only to resist US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a independent and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in taking action, it must plant a flag 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 liberal multilateralism, will resist foreign pressure 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 example of Lula in Brazil, who faced down Trump and demonstrated that the approach to deal with a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose symbolic penalties, to anticipate a better future, it will have already lost.