🔗 Share this article

Can Brussels ever stand up to Donald Trump and American tech giants? Present passivity goes beyond a legal or economic shortcoming: it represents a moral failure. This inaction undermines the core principles of Europe's democratic identity. The central issue is not merely the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to govern its own online environment according to its own regulations.

The Path to This Point

To begin, consider how we got here. In late July, the European Commission accepted a one-sided agreement with the US that locked in a permanent 15% tax on European goods to the US. The EU gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also agreed to direct well over $1tn to the US through investments and acquisitions of energy and military materiel. This arrangement exposed the vulnerability of Europe's dependence on the US.

Soon after, Trump warned of crushing new tariffs if Europe enforced its laws against American companies on its own soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million rich people gives it significant sway in international commerce. But in the six weeks since the US warning, Europe has taken minimal action. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No activation of the recently created trade defense tool, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once vowed would be its ultimate shield against foreign pressure.

Instead, we have polite statements and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for established anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its dominant position in Europe's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under the current administration, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to strengthen European democracy. It seeks to undermine it. An official publication published on the US Department of State's platform, written in paranoid, inflammatory language reminiscent of Viktor Orbán's speeches, charged the EU of “systematic efforts against democratic values itself”. It criticized supposed restrictions on authoritarian parties across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument functions through calculating the degree of the pressure and imposing retaliatory measures. Provided EU member states agree, the EU executive could remove US products out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their financial activities and demand reparations as a requirement of readmittance to EU economic space.

The tool is not only financial response; it is a declaration of determination. It was designed to signal that Europe would always resist 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 preceding the EU-US trade deal, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the instrument to be activated. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the last thing that Europe needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the anti-coercion instrument, Europe should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that recommend content the user has not requested, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the algorithms of foreign oligarchs beholden to external agendas – should have the autonomy to make independent choices about what they view and share online.

Trump is pressuring the EU to water down its digital rulebook. But now more than ever, the EU should make large US tech firms accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. Brussels must hold certain member states responsible for not implementing Europe's online regulations on American companies.

Enforcement is insufficient, however. Europe must progressively replace all non-EU “big tech” services and computing infrastructure over the next decade with European solutions.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of the current situation is that if Europe does not take immediate action, it will never act again. The more delay occurs, the more profound the decline of its confidence in itself. The more it will believe that opposition is pointless. The greater the tendency that its regulations are not binding, its institutions not sovereign, its political system dependent.

When that happens, the path to undemocratic rule becomes inevitable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of lies. If Europe continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same decline. The EU must take immediate steps, not only to push back against Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to exist as a independent and sovereign entity.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and East Asia, democracies are observing. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will stand against external influence or surrender to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can survive when the leading democratic nation in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Brazilian leadership, who confronted Trump and showed that the way to address a bully is to respond firmly.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release polite statements, to impose symbolic penalties, to anticipate a better future, it will have already lost.