🔗 Share this article

Will the EU finally resist Donald Trump and American tech giants? Present inaction goes beyond a legal or financial failure: it constitutes a moral collapse. This inaction calls into question the very foundation of Europe's democratic identity. What is at stake is not only the fate of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the authority to govern its own digital space according to its own rules.

Background Context

First, let us recount how we got here. In late July, the EU executive accepted a one-sided agreement with the US that locked in a permanent 15% tax on EU exports to the US. Europe gained no concessions in return. The indignity was compounded because the EU also consented to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of resources and defense equipment. The deal revealed the fragility of Europe's reliance on the US.

Less than a month later, the US administration warned of crushing additional taxes if the EU implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action

Over many years Brussels has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million affluent people gives it significant sway in trade negotiations. But in the six weeks since the US warning, the EU has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been implemented. No invocation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its primary protection against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have diplomatic language and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, already proven in US courts, that enabled it to “abuse” its market leadership in Europe's advertising market.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to support EU institutions. It aims to weaken it. A recent essay published on the US Department of State's website, written in alarmist, inflammatory rhetoric similar to Hungarian leadership, charged the EU of “an aggressive campaign against democratic values itself”. It condemned alleged limitations on authoritarian parties across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to Polish organizations.

Available Tools for Response

How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument functions through assessing the extent of the coercion and applying counter-actions. If EU member states agree, the EU executive could remove US products out of Europe's market, or impose taxes on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their financial activities and demand compensation as a condition of re-entry to EU economic space.

The instrument is not only economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to signal that Europe would always resist foreign coercion. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the months leading to the EU-US trade deal, many European governments used strong language in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Others, such as Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

Compromise is the last thing that Europe needs. It must implement its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the trade tool, the EU should disable social media “for you”-style systems, that suggest material the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are proven safe for democratic societies.

Comprehensive Approach

The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires beholden to external agendas – should have the freedom to make independent choices about what they view and distribute online.

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its digital rulebook. But now more than ever, the EU should hold large US tech firms responsible for anti-competitive market rigging, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. Brussels must hold Ireland accountable for failing to enforce Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all foreign “big tech” platforms and computing infrastructure over the coming years with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of the current situation is that if the EU does not act now, it will never act again. The longer it waits, the more profound the erosion of its self-belief in itself. The increasing acceptance that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its laws are unenforceable, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the path to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If the EU continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same abyss. Europe must take immediate steps, not just to resist Trump, but to create space for itself to function as a independent and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In North America, Asia and Japan, democracies are observing. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist foreign pressure or yield to it.

They are asking whether representative governments can endure when the most powerful democracy in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Brazilian leadership, who faced down US pressure and demonstrated that the approach to address a bully is to respond firmly.

But if the EU hesitates, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy token fines, to anticipate a better future, it will have already lost.