🔗 Share this article Europe's Hidden Tool to Counter US Economic Coercion: Time to Activate It Can Brussels ever stand up to Donald Trump and American tech giants? Present inaction is not just a regulatory or financial failure: it represents a moral failure. This inaction calls into question the core principles of the EU's democratic identity. The central issue is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that the European Union has the right to govern its own digital space according to its own laws. Background Context First, it's important to review how we got here. In late July, the European Commission agreed to a humiliating agreement with the US that established a permanent 15% tariff on EU exports to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The embarrassment was all the greater because the EU also agreed to direct more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and acquisitions of resources and military materiel. The deal revealed the fragility of the EU's dependence on the US. Soon after, the US administration threatened crushing new tariffs if Europe implemented its regulations against US tech firms on its own territory. The Gap Between Rhetoric and Action For decades EU officials has claimed that its economic zone of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable sway in trade negotiations. But in the month and a half since the US warning, the EU has taken minimal action. Not a single retaliatory measure has been taken. No invocation of the recently created anti-coercion instrument, the so-called “trade bazooka” that the EU once promised would be its ultimate protection against foreign pressure. Instead, we have polite statements and a penalty on Google of under 1% of its annual revenue for longstanding anticompetitive behaviour, already proven in US courts, that allowed it to “exploit” its market leadership in Europe's advertising market. US Intentions The US, under Trump's leadership, has signaled its goals: it no longer seeks to strengthen EU institutions. It seeks to weaken it. A recent essay published on the US Department of State's website, written in paranoid, inflammatory rhetoric reminiscent of Viktor Orbán's speeches, accused Europe of “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself”. It criticized supposed restrictions on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to PiS in Poland. Available Tools for Response How should Europe respond? The EU's anti-coercion instrument works by calculating the degree of the pressure and imposing counter-actions. If most European governments agree, the EU executive could kick US goods and services out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can remove their patents and copyrights, prevent their investments and demand compensation as a condition of readmittance to EU economic space. The tool is not merely economic retaliation; it is a declaration of determination. It was designed to signal that Europe would never tolerate foreign coercion. But now, when it is needed most, it lies unused. It is not the powerful weapon promised. It is a symbolic object. Political Divisions In the period preceding the EU-US trade deal, several EU states talked tough in public, but did not advocate the mechanism to be activated. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated more conciliatory approach. Compromise is the worst option that Europe needs. It must implement its regulations, even when they are challenging. In addition to the trade tool, the EU should disable social media “recommended”-style algorithms, that suggest content the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are demonstrated to be secure for democracy. Broader Digital Strategy The public – not the algorithms of international billionaires beholden to foreign interests – should have the autonomy to decide for themselves about what they see and distribute online. Trump is putting Europe under pressure to water down its digital rulebook. But now more than ever, the EU should make American technology companies accountable for distorting competition, surveillance practices, and targeting minors. EU authorities must ensure certain member states responsible for failing to enforce Europe's digital rules on American companies. Regulatory action is insufficient, however. The EU must gradually substitute all non-EU “major technology” platforms and cloud services over the coming years with European solutions. The Danger of Inaction The real danger of the current situation is that if the EU does not take immediate action, it will become permanently passive. The more delay occurs, the deeper the erosion of its self-belief in itself. The increasing acceptance that resistance is futile. The more it will accept that its regulations are not binding, its governmental bodies lacking autonomy, its democracy dependent. When that occurs, the path to authoritarianism becomes unavoidable, through algorithmic manipulation on social media and the acceptance of misinformation. If the EU continues to cower, it will be drawn into that same abyss. The EU must take immediate steps, not only to push back against Trump, but to create space for itself to exist as a independent and autonomous power. International Perspective And in doing so, it must plant a flag that the international community can see. In Canada, South Korea and Japan, 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 endure when the leading democratic nation in the world abandons them. They also see the model of Lula in Brazil, who confronted US pressure and showed that the way to address a aggressor is to hit hard. But if Europe delays, if it continues to issue polite statements, to impose symbolic penalties, to anticipate a better future, it will have effectively surrendered.