🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels ever resist Donald Trump and American tech giants? The current passivity goes beyond a regulatory or financial failure: it constitutes a moral collapse. This inaction undermines the core principles of Europe's political sovereignty. What is at stake is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that the European Union has the right to regulate its own online environment according to its own regulations.

How We Got Here

To begin, consider how we got here. In late July, the EU executive accepted a one-sided agreement with the US that locked in a permanent 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 direct more than $1tn to the US through investments and purchases of resources and military materiel. The deal exposed the fragility of the EU's reliance on the US.

Soon after, the US administration threatened severe new tariffs if the EU implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels 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 the US warning, the EU has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been implemented. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the often described “trade bazooka” that the EU once promised would be its primary shield against external coercion.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding market abuses, already proven in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to support EU institutions. It seeks to undermine it. A recent essay published on the US Department of State's platform, composed in paranoid, bombastic rhetoric similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged Europe of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It criticized alleged limitations on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? The EU's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the degree of the coercion and applying retaliatory measures. If most European governments consent, the European Commission could remove US products out of the EU market, or impose tariffs on them. It can remove their intellectual property rights, prevent their financial activities and demand compensation as a condition of readmittance to Europe's market.

The instrument is not only economic retaliation; it is a statement 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 the powerful weapon promised. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the months leading to the transatlantic agreement, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but did not advocate the instrument to be used. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

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

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the automated systems of international billionaires serving external agendas – should have the freedom to make independent choices about what they see and distribute online.

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to water down its online regulations. But now especially important, the EU should make American technology companies responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, snooping on Europeans, and preying on our children. EU authorities must ensure Ireland accountable for not implementing EU online regulations on US firms.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. The EU must gradually substitute all non-EU “big tech” services and cloud services over the next decade with European solutions.

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 deeper the erosion of its self-belief in itself. The increasing acceptance that opposition is pointless. The greater the tendency that its laws are unenforceable, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its political system dependent.

When that happens, the path to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of lies. If the EU continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same decline. Europe must act now, not just to resist Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to exist as a free and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the international community can see. In Canada, Asia and Japan, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will stand against foreign pressure 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 model of Brazilian leadership, who faced down US pressure and showed that the approach to deal with a bully is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose token fines, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.