🔗 Share this article

Can the EU finally stand up to the US administration and American tech giants? Present passivity goes beyond a regulatory or economic failure: it constitutes a ethical collapse. This inaction calls into question the very foundation of Europe'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 digital space according to its own laws.

The Path to This Point

To begin, it's important to review the events leading here. In late July, the EU executive agreed to a humiliating deal with the US that established a ongoing 15% tariff on European goods to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also consented to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of energy and military materiel. The deal revealed the fragility of the EU's reliance on the US.

Soon after, the US administration threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU enforced its regulations against American companies on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has claimed that its market of 450 million rich people gives it significant leverage in trade negotiations. But in the six weeks since the US warning, the EU has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been implemented. No activation of the new trade defense tool, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once vowed would be its primary protection against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for longstanding market abuses, already proven in US courts, that enabled it to “exploit” its dominant position in Europe's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under Trump's leadership, has signaled its goals: it does not aim to strengthen EU institutions. It seeks to undermine it. An official publication released on the US State Department website, written in alarmist, bombastic rhetoric similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged the EU 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.

Available Tools for Response

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism functions through calculating the degree of the coercion and imposing retaliatory measures. Provided EU member states agree, the EU executive could kick US products out of the EU market, or impose taxes on them. It can strip their patents and copyrights, prevent their investments and require compensation as a requirement of readmittance to Europe's market.

The tool is not merely financial response; it is a statement of political will. It was created to signal that the EU would always resist foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the period preceding the transatlantic agreement, several EU states used strong language in public, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are challenging. Along with the trade tool, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend content the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

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

The US administration is pressuring the EU to weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, the EU should hold American technology companies accountable for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. Brussels must ensure certain member states responsible for failing to enforce EU online regulations on American companies.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. The EU must gradually substitute all foreign “major technology” platforms and cloud services over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of the current situation is that if Europe does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the deeper the erosion 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 institutions not sovereign, its democracy dependent.

When that happens, the path to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of lies. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be pulled toward that same decline. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to resist US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a free and autonomous power.

Global Implications

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In North America, Asia and East Asia, democracies are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will resist external influence or surrender to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world turns its back on them. They also see the model of Lula in Brazil, who confronted Trump and demonstrated that the way to deal with a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if the EU hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have effectively surrendered.