Europe at crossroads: Will Brussels finally confront Trump and big tech?

A recent Guardian opinion piece delivers a scathing critique of the European Union’s (EU) failure to stand up to US President Donald Trump and American tech giants, portraying the EU’s inaction not merely as a strategic lapse but a “moral failure” that undermines the democratic identity of Europe itself.

According to the article, the core issue is Europe’s inability or unwillingness to enforce its own laws on its own soil, particularly against US digital monopolies, which risks reducing the continent to “a vassal to Washington and to Silicon Valley.”

The Guardian recounts the chain of events that triggered this alarm. In July, the European Commission accepted a trade deal with Trump that imposed a lasting 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. In return, Europe received virtually nothing, the author asserts, describing it as a “humiliating deal” that exposed the EU’s economic dependence on the US. Notably, this came with additional European commitments to spend over $1 trillion on US energy and military goods.

This vulnerability was soon exploited. Within a month of the agreement, Trump threatened new tariffs if Europe moved ahead with enforcing digital market regulations against US tech firms such as Google and Meta. The opinion piece claims that despite this coercion, the EU has failed to respond robustly. No retaliatory action has been taken, and even the EU’s much-publicised “anti-coercion instrument” — once described as a “trade bazooka” — has remained unused.

The Guardian argues that this delay is especially concerning because the anti-coercion instrument was intended precisely for moments like this — to enable Europe to retaliate against economic blackmail. It empowers the EU to impose tariffs, restrict investments, or block intellectual property rights of coercing states.

Yet, the article laments, this mechanism remains a “paperweight,” as European governments either avoided pressing for its activation or actively pushed for a softer stance — with Ireland and Italy cited as examples.

The Guardian criticises recent regulatory actions by the EU as insufficient, citing a recent fine against Google that amounted to less than 1% of the company’s annual revenue. According to the article, this does little to deter large-scale market abuse and contrasts sharply with what the writer portrays as a broader failure to act decisively against systemic anti-competitive behaviour by US tech firms in Europe.

Beyond economic coercion, the piece addresses what it sees as a deeper political threat: the undermining of democratic systems through algorithmic manipulation. The article calls on the EU to suspend the operation of “for you” recommendation algorithms by foreign platforms in Europe unless they can be proven safe for democratic societies. These algorithms allow foreign tech companies to shape European discourse without accountability.

Particular criticism is also directed at Ireland, home to the European headquarters of many US tech companies. The article accuses Irish authorities of failing to enforce the EU’s Digital Services Act and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), thereby weakening the EU’s collective regulatory power.

Looking ahead, the Guardian piece advocates for a bold, long-term strategy of technological sovereignty. It proposes a phased replacement of US platforms and cloud services with EU-based alternatives over the next decade — not merely as economic policy but as a necessity for democratic self-determination.

Democracies in countries like Canada, South Korea, and Japan are watching closely to see whether the EU can assert its sovereignty in the face of growing pressure from the US. The article references Brazil’s President Lula as an example of how to confront Trump’s aggression, noting that “the way to deal with a bully is to hit hard.”

The Guardian presents the moment as a critical juncture: failure to act now will entrench European dependence, corrode institutional confidence, and accelerate democratic decline. The article’s warning is stark — that Europe’s passivity may soon render it incapable of defending its own laws or values, and that if it does not assert its sovereignty soon, it may never do so again.

By Sabina Mammadli