🔗 Share this article

Can Brussels finally resist Donald Trump and US big tech? Present passivity is not just a legal or economic shortcoming: it represents a ethical collapse. This inaction throws into question the very foundation of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that Europe has the authority to govern its own online environment according to its own regulations.

Background Context

First, it's important to review how we got here. During the summer, the European Commission agreed to a one-sided deal with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. The EU received nothing in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the EU also consented to direct more than $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, the US administration threatened crushing new tariffs if the EU implemented its laws 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 affluent people gives it significant leverage in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, the EU has done little. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No invocation of the new anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its ultimate shield against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have polite statements and a penalty on Google of less than 1% of its yearly income for established market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “exploit” its market leadership in Europe's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under the current administration, has signaled its goals: it no longer seeks to strengthen European democracy. It seeks to undermine it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's website, written in paranoid, bombastic language reminiscent of Hungarian leadership, charged Europe of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It condemned alleged restrictions on authoritarian parties across the EU, from German political movements to PiS in Poland.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? Europe's trade defense mechanism works by assessing the extent of the pressure and applying counter-actions. If EU member states agree, the EU executive could kick US products out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their investments and require reparations as a condition of re-entry to Europe's market.

The tool is not only financial response; it is a declaration of determination. It was created to demonstrate that the EU would never tolerate external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Internal Disagreements

In the months leading to the EU-US trade deal, several EU states used strong language in public, but failed to push for the instrument to be used. Others, including Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the last thing that the EU needs. It must enforce its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should shut down social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires beholden to foreign interests – should have the autonomy to make independent choices about what they see and distribute online.

The US administration is pressuring the EU to weaken its online regulations. But now especially important, Europe should make American technology companies accountable for anti-competitive market rigging, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must ensure certain member states accountable for not implementing Europe's digital rules on US firms.

Regulatory action is not enough, however. Europe must progressively replace all foreign “major technology” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with European solutions.

Risks of Delay

The real danger of this moment is that if the EU 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 greater the tendency that its regulations are not binding, its institutions lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of misinformation. If the EU continues to remain passive, it will be drawn into that same abyss. Europe must act now, not only to resist Trump, but to create space for itself to exist as a independent and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in taking action, it must make a statement that the rest of the world can see. In North America, Asia and East Asia, democracies are observing. They are wondering if the EU, the remaining stronghold of liberal multilateralism, will stand against external influence or surrender to it.

They are asking whether representative governments can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the example of Lula in Brazil, who confronted US pressure and showed that the way to address a bully is to respond firmly.

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