🔗 Share this article

Can Brussels finally confront Donald Trump and American tech giants? The current passivity is not just a regulatory or financial shortcoming: it represents a moral failure. This situation throws into question the very foundation of the EU's democratic identity. The central issue is not only the future of firms such as Google or Meta, but the principle that the European Union has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

How We Got Here

First, consider how we got here. During the summer, the EU executive accepted a one-sided deal with Trump that locked in a ongoing 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 consented to provide more than $1tn to the US through investments and purchases of resources and defense equipment. This arrangement exposed the fragility of the EU's reliance on the US.

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

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

For decades Brussels has asserted that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable sway in international commerce. But in the month and a half since the US warning, Europe has taken minimal action. Not a single counter-action has been implemented. No activation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its ultimate protection against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for established anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “exploit” 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 aims to undermine it. An official publication published on the US State Department platform, composed in alarmist, bombastic language similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged the EU of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It criticized supposed restrictions on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the degree of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. Provided 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 patents and copyrights, block their financial activities and demand reparations as a requirement of readmittance to Europe's market.

The tool is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of determination. It was designed to signal that the EU would never tolerate external pressure. But now, when it is needed most, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the months leading to the transatlantic agreement, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be used. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the worst option that the EU needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, Europe should shut down social media “recommended”-style systems, that recommend content the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the automated systems of international billionaires serving foreign interests – should have the autonomy 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 large US tech firms accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and preying on our children. EU authorities must hold Ireland responsible for not implementing Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must progressively replace all non-EU “major technology” services and cloud services over the coming years with European solutions.

Risks of Delay

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 more it will believe that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its regulations are not binding, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its political system dependent.

When that happens, the route to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of lies. If the EU continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same decline. The EU must act now, not just to resist Trump, but to create space for itself to function as a free and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the rest of the world can see. In Canada, South Korea and Japan, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the remaining stronghold of liberal multilateralism, will resist external influence or yield 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 Lula in Brazil, who confronted Trump and showed that the way to address a aggressor is to hit hard.

But if Europe delays, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.