🔗 Share this article

Can the EU finally resist Donald Trump and US big tech? The current passivity is not just a regulatory or economic shortcoming: it represents a ethical collapse. This situation undermines the very foundation of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not only the fate of companies like Google or Meta, but the principle that Europe has the right to regulate its own digital space according to its own rules.

Background Context

First, let us recount how we got here. During the summer, the EU executive accepted a humiliating agreement with Trump that established a permanent 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The indignity was all the greater because the commission also agreed to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of energy and defense equipment. This arrangement exposed the fragility of Europe's reliance on the US.

Soon after, the US administration warned of severe additional taxes if Europe enforced its regulations 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 sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since the US warning, the EU has taken minimal action. No retaliatory measure has been implemented. No activation of the new trade defense tool, the often described “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary protection against external coercion.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “abuse” its dominant position in the EU's advertising market.

American Strategy

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to strengthen EU institutions. It aims to undermine it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's website, composed in paranoid, bombastic rhetoric reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, charged the EU of “systematic efforts against Western civilization itself”. It criticized supposed restrictions on authoritarian parties across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument functions through calculating the extent of the pressure and applying retaliatory measures. Provided most European governments agree, the European Commission could kick US goods and services out of the EU market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their investments and require reparations as a condition of re-entry to Europe's market.

The tool is not merely financial response; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to signal that Europe 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 months preceding the transatlantic agreement, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the last thing that the EU needs. It must implement its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should shut down social media “for you”-style algorithms, that recommend material the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires serving external agendas – should have the freedom to decide for themselves about what they see 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 distorting competition, snooping on Europeans, and preying on our children. EU authorities must ensure certain member states responsible for not implementing EU online regulations on US firms.

Enforcement is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace all foreign “major technology” services and cloud services over the coming years with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The significant risk of the current situation is that if the EU does not act now, it will become permanently passive. The longer it waits, the deeper the decline of its self-belief in itself. The increasing acceptance that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its laws are unenforceable, its institutions lacking autonomy, its political system not self-determined.

When that happens, the path to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. The EU must act now, not just to resist US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a free and sovereign entity.

Global Implications

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In North America, South Korea and East Asia, democratic nations are watching. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist foreign pressure or yield to it.

They are inquiring whether representative governments can endure when the leading democratic nation in the world turns its back on them. They also see the example of Brazilian leadership, who confronted US pressure and demonstrated that the approach to address a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if the EU delays, if it continues to release polite statements, to levy token fines, to anticipate a better future, it will have effectively surrendered.