logo
Can Europe unplug from Trump's America?

Can Europe unplug from Trump's America?

New European3 days ago

All of that may be fairly obvious to the casual internet user. But when you go to the news website of your daily newspaper, although it may be published thousands of miles from the US, its website is still hosted on a US platform like Azure, which is Microsoft's cloud. An ad catches your eye for something local, but that ad is hosted on Amazon Web Services. You decide to make a purchase using a saved Visa credit card. The email confirmation lands in your Gmail inbox. All American. There's no escaping the fact that almost every business you interact with online relies on the services of a US tech giant.
It may not feel this way, but for millions of people, the online world is a purely American experience. Your iPhone, for example, was of course designed in California. When you tap the browser, you probably use Apple's Safari to get online, and when you type a search term you use the default search engine, which is Google.
America's technological reach doesn't end with the consumer. From your child's school, to your place of work, to council-run local services and even to the inner workings of the national government, the systems on which they rely are powered by just three companies: Amazon (30% global share of all money spent on cloud services), Microsoft (21%) and Google (12%). You may think you know these companies – but they have changed into cloud-computing 'hyperscalers'. They have built massive infrastructure businesses, offering on-demand computing power and the ready-to-use software tools that underpin our digital economies, and our lives.
To say we're in bed with these tech giants is an understatement: over 80% of spending on cloud services and software by large European enterprises goes to US providers. But does it matter? If the tech is slick, quick and convenient, where's the catch? The answer to that question is currently sitting in the Oval Office.
'Since the election of Donald Trump, who is supported by tech CEOs and has killed the transatlantic relationship, this is now a matter of urgent national security concern,' says Marietje Schaake, a Dutch politician and former MEP. 'People see the clear risk of US tech being weaponised.' The solution, she says, is to make 'the EU digitally sovereign.' How might that work?
'We've been infantilised by decades of American support,' says the economist Cristina Caffarra, who is co-author of EuroStack, a plan to shrink Europe's dependence on foreign technology by supporting homegrown alternatives. 'In the space of 20 years, all of the underlying supply chain that supports all of the services and apps that we use every day has become mostly American.'
'Digital sovereignty is not about ripping off every bit of American kit from every bit of the land – that is not realistic and feasible,' Caffarra says. 'But we need Europe to regain some ability to have some autonomy, to have some resilience, some fallback.' Those are necessary, she says, 'in case of catastrophic incidents' or 'disputes'.
'Microsoft is absolutely owning the entire infrastructure in Denmark,' she says. 'Suppose Trump wants to walk into Greenland and he wants Microsoft to assist in this operation. Microsoft could be told to disable certain services and could be put under an executive order to do so.'
Political kill switches for mainstream services may sound dramatic – but then Trump recently ordered the US firm Maxar Technologies to cut off commercial satellite data to Ukraine, to pressure it in negotiations with Russia. US technology provision is already being weaponised – why should Trump limit his leverage to Ukraine?
Caffarra is not the only one raising the alarm over Europe's predicament. More than 200 industry interests put their name to an open letter urging the EU to support a sovereign digital infrastructure plan. The European Commission responded that it has plans including a review of public procurement rules, but supporters of the EuroStack plan say none of this goes far enough.
In the meantime, any European governments putting their email into the US cloud should be in 'no doubt' that their messages are being read, warns Bert Hubert, a Dutch entrepreneur and digital infrastructure expert who has written extensively about Europe's digital sovereignty problem.
Regardless of whether or not Trump actively threatens Europe with disconnection, what troubles Hubert is 'the mere thought that you have to be careful… that 'I should not antagonise the US.'' The problem, he says, is that a government's functions are not entirely under its own control. In other words, Europe is a digital colony of the US, and is now waking up to the consequences of that fact.
The digital sovereignty issue also raised its head during the Covid crisis, when governments wanted to use contact-tracing apps as a public health measure. It then became clear that they could only do so with the consent of Apple and Google.
One possible piece of the solution is presented by Element, a European developer that provides encrypted communication systems that are self-hosted, meaning that no large tech firm is underpinning your system and gathering up your data. Element is now supplying parts of Germany's armed forces and the French government.
'Traditional centralised technology firms can no longer be trusted to provide services to their customers,' says its COO, Amandine Le Pape. The gravest danger was demonstrated, she says, by Starlink, the satellite internet service owned by Elon Musk and used by, among others, the Ukrainian military. At one point earlier this year Musk raised the possibility of shutting Ukrainian forces out of Starlink. That service has become 'subject to political whim,' Le Pape says.
And so here we are, Hubert says, in a 'quite absurd situation' in which policymakers lack the technical nous to actually understand the predicament they are in. 'The people that make these decisions are not just bad with technology,' he says. 'They are technically illiterate.'
Which means that for most governments, the question of digital infrastructure sits in the 'too difficult to resolve' pile. But how much longer can this go on? Perhaps recognising the shifts in opinion, in April, Microsoft announced a set of crisis PR-sounding 'new European digital commitments' – including a pledge to 'uphold Europe's digital resilience even when there is geopolitical volatility'.
'The shorthand is, total market enforcement failure of competition rules and data protection rules allowed a bunch of [technology] oligarchs to exist – and then the country where those oligarchs are based elected a king,' says Johnny Ryan, a director of Enforce, a unit of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties that's focused on Big Tech.
While there's certainly a cost involved in rewiring Europe's digital foundations, Ryan contends that this is 'almost zero' when set alongside the risks of doing nothing, and remaining strategically compromised by Trump.
Caffarra also downplays the cost of the proposals set out in the EuroStack plan, suggesting a lot could be done with mandates encouraging governments and businesses to 'buy European'. However, one upper estimate of the cost of achieving digital sovereignty for Europe is around €300bn over a decade.
Hubert is under no illusions about how difficult switching away from the hyper-convenient US cloud will be, even as he supports the goal. 'The main issue with any European plan is who is going to do it?' he says. Existing European cloud players are not well suited to becoming 24/7 software service behemoths, which means this switch certainly can't happen overnight. And it will be 'very hard work'.
'The question for the EuroStack is really how deep it can go,' says Michael Veale, an associate professor of Digital Rights and Regulation at UCL, sounding sceptical about whether Europe is really up to taking control of its digital fortunes against such 'entrenched and resilient' competition. 'The introduction of credible and properly funded alternatives alone creates a possibility for change, but the incumbents have a lot of tricks up their sleeves, and deep infrastructures under their control, which will pose barriers to real change.'
But perhaps the biggest problem of all when confronting the American hyperscalers is that none of these tech giants is actually in control. Ultimately, digital sovereignty isn't a technology lever – it's a political hinge. You only have to think back to the line-up of Silicon Valley CEOs at Trump's inauguration for a snapshot of where the real power lies. And no amount of European legislation can do anything about that.
Natasha Lomas is a writer on technology who is based in Barcelona

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Microsoft unit in Russia to file for bankruptcy, database shows
Microsoft unit in Russia to file for bankruptcy, database shows

Reuters

time11 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Microsoft unit in Russia to file for bankruptcy, database shows

May 30 (Reuters) - One of Microsoft Corp's (MSFT.O), opens new tab subsidiaries in Russia plans to file for bankruptcy, according to a note published on the official Fedresurs registry on Friday. Microsoft did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment. President Vladimir Putin said this week that foreign service providers like Microsoft and Zoom (ZM.O), opens new tab should be "throttled" in Russia to make way for domestic software solutions. Microsoft continued providing key services in Russia after Moscow's February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, but in June 2022 it said it was significantly scaling down its operations due to changes to the economic outlook and the impact on its business there. The U.S. tech giant had already removed Russian state-owned media outlet RT's mobile apps from the Windows App store and banned advertisements on Russian state-sponsored media in the days after the invasion. The note posted on Fedresurs on Friday said that Microsoft Rus LLC was intending to declare bankruptcy. The TASS news agency reported that Microsoft has three other Russian units - Microsoft Development Centre Rus, Microsoft Mobile Rus and Microsoft Payments Rus. It was not immediately clear how those units might be affected. Alphabet-owned Google's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab Russian subsidiary filed for bankruptcy in 2022, saying that the seizure of its bank account by Russian authorities had made it untenable for its Russian office to function, including paying Russia-based employees, suppliers and vendors.

‘They'll blame Donald Trump': Karl Rove warns tariffs will turn 2026 voters to Democrats, Navarro goes ballistic
‘They'll blame Donald Trump': Karl Rove warns tariffs will turn 2026 voters to Democrats, Navarro goes ballistic

The Independent

time17 minutes ago

  • The Independent

‘They'll blame Donald Trump': Karl Rove warns tariffs will turn 2026 voters to Democrats, Navarro goes ballistic

Longtime GOP strategist Karl Rove warned this week that the 'muddled mess' around Donald Trump's 'chaotic trade talk' could 'badly damage' the Republican Party in the midterms next year, adding that voters would 'blame' the president for higher prices and scarce goods. The stern words from Rove, a longtime Fox News contributor, prompted the president's trade adviser to rage against the former George W. Bush deputy chief of staff and campaign architect on Rove's own network. 'Shame on you, Karl Rove,' Peter Navarro growled during a Thursday afternoon appearance on Fox Business. In a column for the Wall Street Journal, Rove explained that Republicans are stuck dealing with 'two messaging challenges' at the moment – Medicaid funding in the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' and the president's tariffs. 'The story isn't good for the GOP,' Rove noted, pointing out that Trump is severely underwater in polls on his handling of the economy, largely due to concerns that his trade policy will spark inflation and a recession. 'That starts to explain why stock markets drop when Mr. Trump rattles his trade saber and rebound when he walks back his tariff threats,' he added, seemingly referencing the 'TACO' strategy Wall Street investors have employed when it comes to the president's latest trade announcements. 'The administration's messaging is a muddled mess,' he added. 'Republicans should hope the president really believes in reciprocity—the policy that if countries lower their tariffs, we'll lower ours. He should have confidence that America can compete if the playing field is level.' 'Unless reciprocity prevails, the president's chaotic trade talk will badly damage Republicans in the midterms,' Rove concluded. 'And if the House or Senate flips, the president will find it much harder to advance his priorities in his final two years. Voters won't blame foreign countries for higher prices or fewer goods. They'll blame Donald Trump and his Republican Party.' Meanwhile, shortly after Rove's column dropped, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had 'exceeded his authority' with the majority of the import taxes he'd imposed over the past few months, including last month's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. A federal appeals court followed up by temporarily reinstating the tariffs until the legal challenges fully play out. Appearing on Fox Business Network's The Claman Countdown, Navarro fumed about the 'rogue judges' who rejected the administration's arguments that Trump currently has broad authority to import sweeping tariffs under emergency powers. Fox anchor Liz Claman, meanwhile, reminded Navarro that one of the trade court judges was appointed by Trump himself. Navarro had a similar meltdown Thursday when a reporter for The Independent, Andrew Feinberg, asked about the frequency with which the administration attacks judges as 'activists' when the president or his officials disagree with their rulings. 'Who is this guy?' the hair-trigger Navarro railed, evading the question in the process. Claman also brought up Rove's warning that the ongoing uncertainty over the president's trade policies and the potential economic damage they could unleash may end up hurting the GOP in upcoming elections. Navarro, echoing the president's repeated criticism of his one-time political adviser, personally tore into Rove in response. 'Let's start with Karl Rove. Karl Rove is the guy who lost the Georgia two Senate seats for us. And his day has passed about…a decade ago,' Navarro groused, referencing Republicans losing both of the 2021 Senate runoff races. 'He hates the tariffs, he hates Donald Trump.' He continued: 'Anything he says is totally discounted, and he said the same stuff during the first term. He said that consumers were gonna eat the tariffs. They did not. Shame on you, Karl Rove! When are you gonna learn, sir?' Since Trump first left office after his 2020 loss to Joe Biden, Rove has repeatedly criticized the president over his 'reckless petulance' and criminal behavior, naturally leading the president to fire back with personal attacks and demands that Fox News fire the Republican consultant. Following Trump's return to the White House earlier this year, Rove has sounded the alarm on Trump's sinking poll numbers while pointing out that Americans are 'already exhausted' with the president's 'flood the zone' tactics. 'There's way too much retribution. Most of the president's revenge attempts will end badly for him. Republicans could rue the day they set a new justification for retaliation from Democrats,' Rove argued last month. 'I don't need to have Karl Rove of Fox News to tell me what to do. The guy's a total Loser who's been wrong about almost everything!' Trump fired back on Truth Social a few weeks ago.

US Supreme Court lets Trump revoke 'parole' status for migrants
US Supreme Court lets Trump revoke 'parole' status for migrants

Reuters

time25 minutes ago

  • Reuters

US Supreme Court lets Trump revoke 'parole' status for migrants

May 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday let President Donald Trump's administration revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants living in the United States, bolstering the Republican president's drive to step up deportations. The court put on hold Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani order halting the administration's move to end the immigration "parole" granted to 532,000 of these migrants by Trump's predecessor Joe Biden, potentially exposing many of them to rapid removal, while the case plays out in lower courts. As with many of the court's orders issued in an emergency fashion, the decision was unsigned and gave no reasoning. Two of the court's three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, publicly dissented. The court botched its assessment of whether the administration was entitled to freeze Talwani's decision pending the litigation, Jackson wrote in an accompanying opinion. The outcome, Jackson wrote, "undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending." Immigration parole is a form of temporary permission under American law to be in the country for "urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit," allowing recipients to live and work in the United States. Biden, a Democrat, used parole as part of his administration's approach by to deter illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexican border. Trump called for ending humanitarian parole programs in an executive order signed on January 20, his first day back in office. The Department of Homeland Security subsequently moved to terminate them in March, cutting short the two-year parole grants. The administration said revoking the parole status would make it easier to place migrants in a fast-track deportation process called "expedited removal." The case is one of many that Trump's administration has brought in an emergency fashion to the nation's highest judicial body seeking to undo decisions by judges impeding his sweeping policies, including several targeting immigrants. The Supreme Court on May 19 also let Trump end a deportation protection called temporary protected status that had been granted under Biden to about 350,000 Venezuelans living in the United States, while that legal dispute plays out. In a bid to reduce illegal border crossings, Biden starting in 2022 allowed Venezuelans who entered the United States by air to request a two-year parole if they passed security checks and had a U.S. financial sponsor. Biden expanded that process to Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans in 2023 as his administration grappled with high levels of illegal immigration from those nationalities. The plaintiffs, a group of migrants granted parole and Americans who serve as their sponsors, sued administration officials claiming the administration violated federal law governing the actions of government agencies. Talwani in April found that the law governing such parole did not allow for the program's blanket termination, instead requiring a case-by-case review. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to put the judge's decision on hold. In its filing, the Justice Department told the Supreme Court that Talwani's order had upended "critical immigration policies that are carefully calibrated to deter illegal entry," effectively "undoing democratically approved policies that featured heavily in the November election" that returned Trump to the presidency. The plaintiffs told the Supreme Court they would face grave harm if their parole is cut short given that the administration has indefinitely suspended processing their pending applications for asylum and other immigration relief. They said they would be separated from their families and immediately subject to expedited deportation "to the same despotic and unstable countries from which they fled, where many will face serious risks of danger, persecution and even death."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store