🔗 Share this article

Will European leadership finally stand up to Donald Trump and US big tech? Present lack of response goes beyond a regulatory or financial failure: it represents a ethical collapse. This inaction throws into question the bedrock of the EU's democratic identity. The central issue is not only the fate of firms such as Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to regulate its own online environment according to its own regulations.

Background Context

To begin, it's important to review how we got here. During the summer, the European Commission accepted a one-sided agreement with the US that established a permanent 15% tax on European goods to the US. The EU gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the EU also agreed to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of energy and defense equipment. This arrangement revealed the vulnerability of Europe's dependence on the US.

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

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

Over many years EU officials has asserted that its economic zone of 450 million rich people gives it significant leverage in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has taken minimal action. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once promised would be its ultimate shield against external coercion.

Instead, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that enabled it to “abuse” its dominant position in the EU's advertising market.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has signaled its goals: it does not aim to strengthen EU institutions. It seeks to undermine it. A recent essay released on the US State Department website, written in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric reminiscent of Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged the EU of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It criticized supposed restrictions on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? Europe's anti-coercion instrument works by calculating the extent of the coercion and imposing retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments agree, the European Commission could kick US goods and services out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and demand reparations as a requirement of readmittance to EU economic space.

The instrument is not merely economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to demonstrate that the EU would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the months preceding the EU-US trade deal, many European governments talked tough in public, but did not advocate the mechanism to be used. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for a softer European line.

A softer line is the worst option that the EU needs. It must implement its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend material the user has not requested, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

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

The US administration is putting Europe under pressure to water down its online regulations. But now more than ever, the EU should make large US tech firms accountable for anti-competitive market rigging, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must hold certain member states responsible for not implementing Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must progressively replace all foreign “big tech” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of the current situation is that if Europe does not act now, it will never act again. The more delay occurs, the more profound the decline of its confidence in itself. The increasing acceptance that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its regulations are unenforceable, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy not self-determined.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same decline. The EU must take immediate steps, not only to resist Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a independent and sovereign entity.

Global Implications

And in taking action, it must plant a flag that the rest of the world can see. In Canada, Asia and Japan, democratic nations are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will resist external influence or surrender to it.

They are inquiring whether democratic institutions can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Brazilian leadership, who confronted Trump and showed that the approach to address a aggressor is to respond firmly.

But if Europe delays, if it continues to issue diplomatic communications, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a better future, it will have already lost.