🔗 Share this article

Will Brussels ever resist the US administration and US big tech? The current lack of response goes beyond a legal or economic failure: it constitutes a moral collapse. This inaction undermines the bedrock of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not merely the fate of firms such as Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

How We Got Here

To begin, let us recount the events leading here. In late July, the European Commission accepted a humiliating agreement with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tax on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the EU also consented to provide well over $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of resources and defense equipment. The deal revealed the fragility of Europe's dependence on the US.

Soon after, Trump threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU implemented its laws against American companies on its own soil.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades Brussels has claimed that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable sway in trade negotiations. But in the six weeks since the US warning, the EU has done little. Not a single retaliatory measure has been implemented. No activation of the recently created trade defense tool, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its primary protection against external coercion.

Instead, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that enabled 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 European democracy. It aims to weaken it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's website, written in alarmist, bombastic rhetoric similar to Hungarian leadership, charged Europe of “an aggressive campaign against democratic values itself”. It criticized supposed limitations on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? The EU's trade defense mechanism works by calculating the degree of the pressure and applying counter-actions. If most European governments consent, the European Commission could remove US goods and services out of Europe's market, or impose taxes on them. It can strip their patents and copyrights, block their financial activities and demand compensation as a condition of re-entry to EU economic space.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a statement of political will. It was created to demonstrate that the EU would always resist external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a paperweight.

Internal Disagreements

In the period preceding the transatlantic agreement, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but did not advocate the mechanism to be used. Some nations, including Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are challenging. In addition to the anti-coercion instrument, the EU should disable social media “for you”-style systems, that suggest content the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the algorithms of foreign oligarchs beholden to external agendas – should have the autonomy to decide for themselves about what they view and distribute online.

Trump is pressuring the EU 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 ensure certain member states responsible for failing to enforce Europe's digital rules on American companies.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all non-EU “big tech” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of this moment is that if the EU does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The longer it waits, the deeper the decline of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that resistance is futile. The greater the tendency that its regulations are unenforceable, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the path to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be pulled toward that same decline. Europe must act now, not just to resist Trump, but to create space for itself to exist as a independent and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and East Asia, democratic nations are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist foreign pressure or surrender to it.

They are asking whether representative governments can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world turns its back on them. They also see the model of Brazilian leadership, who confronted Trump and demonstrated that the way to address a bully is to respond firmly.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to issue polite statements, to levy token fines, to anticipate a better future, it will have already lost.