🔗 Share this article

Will the EU finally resist Donald Trump and American tech giants? The current lack of response is not just a legal or economic failure: it represents a ethical collapse. This situation undermines the very foundation of Europe's political sovereignty. The central issue is not merely the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that Europe has the authority to regulate its own online environment according to its own rules.

Background Context

To begin, consider how we got here. In late July, the European Commission accepted a humiliating agreement with the US that locked in a ongoing 15% tax on European goods to the US. Europe gained no concessions 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. This arrangement revealed the fragility of Europe's reliance 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 soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

Over many years EU officials has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million rich people gives it unanswerable leverage in trade negotiations. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, Europe has done little. Not a single counter-action has been taken. No invocation of the new trade defense tool, the often described “trade bazooka” that Brussels once promised would be its ultimate shield against foreign pressure.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a fine on Google of under 1% of its yearly income for established market abuses, previously established in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “abuse” its market leadership in Europe's advertising market.

American Strategy

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to strengthen European democracy. It seeks to undermine it. A recent essay released on the US Department of State's website, composed in paranoid, bombastic language similar to Viktor Orbán's speeches, accused the EU of “an aggressive campaign against democratic values itself”. It condemned alleged restrictions on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument functions through assessing the degree of the coercion and imposing retaliatory measures. If most European governments consent, the European Commission could kick US products out of Europe's market, or apply tariffs on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their financial activities and require reparations as a requirement of re-entry to EU economic space.

The instrument is not only financial response; it is a declaration of political will. It was designed to demonstrate that Europe would always resist foreign coercion. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not a bazooka. It is a paperweight.

Political Divisions

In the period leading to the EU-US trade deal, several EU states used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be activated. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the last thing that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend material the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are proven safe for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the automated systems of foreign oligarchs beholden to foreign interests – should have the freedom to decide for themselves about what they view and share online.

The US administration is pressuring the EU to weaken its online regulations. But now more than ever, Europe should make American technology companies responsible for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and preying on our children. EU authorities must ensure Ireland responsible for not implementing Europe's online regulations on American companies.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all foreign “major technology” services and cloud services over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

Risks of Delay

The significant risk of the current situation is that if Europe does not act now, it will never act again. The more delay occurs, the deeper the decline of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its laws are not binding, its institutions not sovereign, its political system dependent.

When that occurs, the route to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same abyss. The EU must act now, not just to resist Trump, but to create space for itself to function as a free and autonomous power.

Global Implications

And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the rest of the world can see. In Canada, Asia and Japan, democratic nations are watching. They are questioning if the EU, the remaining stronghold of liberal multilateralism, will resist external influence or yield to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can survive when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Lula in Brazil, who confronted Trump and showed that the approach to address a bully is to hit hard.

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