🔗 Share this article

Can the EU finally confront the US administration and American tech giants? The current inaction goes beyond a regulatory or economic failure: it represents a ethical collapse. This inaction throws into question the very foundation of Europe's political sovereignty. What is at stake is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that Europe has the authority to govern its own digital space according to its own regulations.

How We Got Here

First, let us recount how we got here. During the summer, the EU executive agreed to a one-sided deal with the US that established a ongoing 15% tariff on European goods to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The indignity was all the greater because the EU also agreed to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of resources and defense equipment. This arrangement exposed the fragility of the EU's dependence on the US.

Soon after, Trump threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU implemented its laws against US tech firms on its own territory.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades EU officials has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million rich people gives it significant sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has done little. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No invocation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its primary protection against external coercion.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that enabled it to “exploit” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under the current administration, has signaled its goals: it no longer seeks to support European democracy. It seeks to undermine it. An official publication published on the US State Department platform, composed in alarmist, bombastic language reminiscent of Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged Europe of “an aggressive campaign 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 extent of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. Provided most European governments consent, the EU executive could remove US goods and services out of Europe's market, or impose taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and require compensation as a condition of re-entry to EU economic space.

The instrument is not merely financial response; it is a statement of political will. It was created to demonstrate that the EU would never tolerate external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the period leading to the transatlantic agreement, several EU states talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument 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. Along with the trade tool, Europe should shut down social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that suggest material the user has not requested, on European soil until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the automated systems of international billionaires beholden to external agendas – should have the autonomy to make independent choices about what they view and share online.

The US administration is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should make large US tech firms responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and preying on our children. EU authorities must hold certain member states responsible for not implementing Europe's online regulations on American companies.

Enforcement is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace all non-EU “major technology” services and cloud services over the next decade with European solutions.

Risks of Delay

The real danger of the current situation is that if the EU does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the deeper the decline of its self-belief in itself. The more it will believe that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its regulations are unenforceable, its institutions not sovereign, its democracy not self-determined.

When that happens, the route to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. The EU must act now, not only to push back against Trump, but to create space for itself to exist as a independent and autonomous power.

Global Implications

And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the international community can see. In Canada, Asia and East Asia, democratic nations are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the remaining stronghold of international cooperation, will resist external influence or yield to it.

They are asking whether representative governments can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who confronted Trump and demonstrated that the approach to address a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if the EU delays, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.