🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels finally stand up to the US administration and American tech giants? Present lack of response goes beyond a legal or financial shortcoming: it represents a moral collapse. This situation calls into question the very foundation of the EU's democratic identity. The central issue is not only the fate of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the authority to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

How We Got Here

To begin, let us recount the events leading here. During the summer, the EU executive agreed to a humiliating agreement with the US that established a ongoing 15% tax on EU exports to the US. The EU gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also consented to provide well over $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of resources and defense equipment. This arrangement revealed the vulnerability of Europe's dependence on the US.

Less than a month later, Trump warned of severe new tariffs if the EU enforced its regulations against American companies 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 trade negotiations. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has done little. Not a single counter-action has been implemented. No invocation of the new trade defense tool, the often described “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary protection against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its market leadership in the EU's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has signaled its goals: it does not aim to support EU institutions. It seeks to weaken it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's platform, composed in alarmist, bombastic rhetoric similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged Europe 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.

Available Tools for Response

What is to be done? The EU's anti-coercion instrument works by calculating the extent of the pressure and imposing retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments consent, the EU executive could remove US products out of the EU market, or impose taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their investments and require reparations as a requirement of re-entry to Europe's market.

The instrument is not merely economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to signal that Europe would always resist foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a symbolic object.

Internal Disagreements

In the period preceding the transatlantic agreement, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be activated. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the last thing that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should disable social media “recommended”-style systems, that recommend material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy.

Comprehensive Approach

The public – not the algorithms of foreign oligarchs beholden to foreign interests – should have the freedom to make independent choices about what they view and distribute online.

The US administration is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its digital rulebook. But now especially important, Europe should hold American technology companies accountable for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. EU authorities must hold certain member states accountable for not implementing Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Enforcement is not enough, however. The EU must gradually substitute all foreign “major technology” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with homegrown alternatives.

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 increasing acceptance that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its regulations are not binding, its governmental bodies not sovereign, its political system dependent.

When that happens, the path to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to push back against Trump, but to create space 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 North America, South Korea and Japan, democratic nations are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of liberal multilateralism, will stand against external influence or yield to it.

They are inquiring whether representative governments can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the example of Lula in Brazil, who confronted Trump and demonstrated that the way to deal with a bully is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy token fines, to hope for a better future, it will have already lost.