Europe's Hidden Weapon to Address Trump's Economic Coercion: Moment to Activate It

Can European leadership ever confront the US administration and US big tech? Present passivity is not just a legal or economic shortcoming: it constitutes a ethical collapse. This inaction undermines the bedrock of the EU's political sovereignty. The central issue is not merely the fate of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that Europe has the right to regulate its own digital space according to its own laws.

Background Context

To begin, it's important to review how we got here. In late July, the EU executive agreed to a one-sided agreement with Trump that locked in a ongoing 15% tax on EU exports to the US. The EU gained no concessions in return. The embarrassment was compounded because the commission also agreed to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of energy and military materiel. This arrangement exposed the fragility of the EU's reliance on the US.

Less than a month later, Trump warned of crushing additional taxes if Europe enforced its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable leverage in trade negotiations. But in the six weeks since the US warning, Europe has taken minimal action. No retaliatory measure has been taken. No activation of the new 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 penalty on Google of less than 1% of its annual revenue for established market abuses, previously established in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its dominant position in the EU's digital ad space.

US Intentions

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it does not aim to support European democracy. It seeks to weaken it. An official publication released on the US State Department platform, composed in alarmist, bombastic language similar to Hungarian leadership, charged Europe of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It criticized alleged limitations on political groups across the EU, from the AfD in Germany to PiS in Poland.

Available Tools for Response

What is to be done? Europe's trade defense mechanism functions through calculating the extent of the coercion and imposing counter-actions. If EU member states agree, the European Commission could remove US goods and services out of the EU market, or apply taxes on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, block their investments and demand compensation as a condition of re-entry to Europe's market.

The instrument is not merely economic retaliation; it is a declaration of political will. It was created to demonstrate that the EU would never tolerate external pressure. But now, when it is most crucial, it remains inactive. It is not a bazooka. It is a symbolic object.

Political Divisions

In the period preceding the EU-US trade deal, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Others, including Ireland and Italy, publicly pushed for more conciliatory approach.

A softer line is the last thing that Europe needs. It must enforce its regulations, even when they are inconvenient. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should shut down social media “for you”-style systems, that recommend material the user has not asked for, on European soil until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy.

Broader Digital Strategy

Citizens – not the algorithms of foreign oligarchs beholden to foreign interests – should have the autonomy to decide for themselves about what they see and distribute online.

Trump is pressuring the EU to water down 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. Brussels must hold certain member states responsible for not implementing EU online regulations on US firms.

Regulatory action is insufficient, however. Europe must gradually substitute all non-EU “major technology” services and computing infrastructure over the next decade with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The real danger of this moment is that if Europe does not act now, 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 resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its laws are not binding, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent.

When that occurs, the route to authoritarianism becomes inevitable, through automated influence on social media and the normalisation of lies. If Europe continues to remain passive, it will be pulled toward that same decline. The EU must act now, not just to resist US pressure, but to establish conditions for itself to exist as a independent and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in doing so, it must make a statement that the international community can see. In Canada, Asia and Japan, democracies are watching. They are wondering if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will stand against foreign pressure or surrender to it.

They are inquiring whether representative governments can endure 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 aggressor is to hit hard.

But if Europe hesitates, if it continues to release diplomatic communications, to levy symbolic penalties, to anticipate a improved situation, it will have already lost.