Europe's Covert Tool to Address Trump's Trade Coercion: Time to Deploy It

Will Brussels finally resist the US administration and American tech giants? Present passivity is not just a legal or financial shortcoming: it constitutes a moral collapse. This inaction undermines the bedrock of the EU's democratic identity. What is at stake is not only the future of companies like Google or Meta, but the fundamental idea that Europe has the right to govern its own online environment according to its own regulations.

How We Got Here

To begin, let us recount the events leading here. In late July, the EU executive agreed to a humiliating agreement with Trump that established a ongoing 15% tax on EU exports to the US. Europe received nothing in return. The indignity was all the greater because the EU also agreed to provide more than $1tn to the US through financial commitments and purchases of energy and military materiel. This arrangement exposed the vulnerability of the EU's dependence on the US.

Soon after, the US administration warned of crushing new tariffs if the EU implemented its laws against American companies on its own soil.

Europe's Claim vs. Reality

For decades Brussels has asserted that its market of 450 million affluent people gives it unanswerable leverage in international commerce. But in the month and a half since Trump's threat, Europe has done little. No counter-action 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 primary protection against external coercion.

By contrast, we have diplomatic language and a fine on Google of less than 1% of its yearly income for longstanding market abuses, already proven in American legal proceedings, that allowed it to “abuse” its dominant position in Europe's digital ad space.

American Strategy

The US, under Trump's leadership, has made its intentions clear: it no longer seeks to support EU institutions. It seeks to weaken it. A recent essay published on the US State Department platform, composed in paranoid, inflammatory language reminiscent of Viktor Orbán's speeches, accused Europe of “systematic efforts against Western civilization itself”. It criticized alleged restrictions on political groups across the EU, from German political movements to Polish organizations.

The Solution: Anti-Coercion Instrument

What is to be done? The EU's anti-coercion instrument functions through assessing the extent of the coercion and applying counter-actions. If most European governments agree, the European Commission could remove US products out of Europe's market, or apply taxes on them. It can strip their intellectual property rights, block their investments and require reparations as a requirement of re-entry 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 never tolerate external pressure. 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 leading to the transatlantic agreement, many European governments talked tough in official statements, but failed to push for the mechanism to be activated. Some nations, such as Ireland and Italy, openly advocated a softer European line.

Compromise is the worst option that the EU needs. It must enforce its laws, even when they are inconvenient. Along with the anti-coercion instrument, the EU should shut down social media “recommended”-style systems, that recommend content the user has not asked for, on EU territory until they are demonstrated to be secure for democratic societies.

Broader Digital Strategy

The public – not the automated systems of foreign oligarchs beholden to external agendas – should have the freedom to make independent choices about what they view and distribute online.

Trump is putting Europe under pressure to weaken its digital rulebook. But now more than ever, the EU should hold large US tech firms accountable for distorting competition, snooping on Europeans, and targeting minors. EU authorities must hold Ireland responsible for failing to enforce Europe's online regulations on US firms.

Enforcement is not enough, however. The EU must progressively replace all foreign “major technology” platforms and cloud services over the coming years with homegrown alternatives.

The Danger of Inaction

The significant risk 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 increasing acceptance that opposition is pointless. The more it will accept that its laws are not binding, its institutions not sovereign, its political system dependent.

When that happens, the path to undemocratic rule becomes unavoidable, through automated influence on social media and the acceptance of lies. If the EU continues to cower, it will be pulled toward that same decline. The EU must take immediate steps, not just to resist Trump, but to establish conditions for itself to function as a independent and autonomous power.

International Perspective

And in taking action, it must plant a flag that the rest of the world can see. In North America, Asia and East Asia, democratic nations are observing. They are questioning if the EU, the last bastion of international cooperation, will resist external influence or surrender to it.

They are asking whether democratic institutions can endure when the leading democratic nation in the world turns its back on them. They also see the model of Lula in Brazil, who faced down US pressure and demonstrated that the approach to address a bully is to respond firmly.

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