EU Tech Sovereignty - Foolish Dream or Inevitable Reality?
By Sabrina Zarrilli
EU’s Dependence on Foreign Tech
Whether checking the news in the morning, buying furniture online or using our IDs to access online services, the most recent data indicate that EU citizens’ everyday existence is heavily reliant on digital tools. Undeniably, these technologies have simplified a myriad of mundane tasks. Yet the convenience and ease of using popular cloud services, productivity suites or authentication systems has meant that we seldom question where the data we share actually goes. Today, the EU can no longer afford to ignore the unseen strategic, economic and geopolitical implications concealed within this blind spot.
The Dangers of Cloud Monopolies
The world was recently rocked by news of Amazon’s provider services shutting down, leading to a worldwide outage of websites, apps and even financial services. The fact that so many companies used Amazon Web Services (AWS) to host their infrastructure meant that the fallout was not just limited to the US online retailer but rather was felt globally. This episode sheds light on an underlying structural fallacy: the cloud and office-productivity markets are dominated by just a handful of big names, creating a quasi-monopolistic environment. For instance, although the EU market has significantly grown in recent years, the number of EU-based cloud space providers has shrunk, while foreign behemoths such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon have become the dominant providers. Such a hyper-reliance on a few providers is, however, inherently risky. A crack in the system can lead to a spiderweb of unforeseen consequences, which become both difficult to anticipate and hard to contain.
Tech Sovereignty as an Answer to Systemic Risk
In recent months, the discourse around EU tech sovereignty has centred more and more on how to be resilient in times of geopolitical upheaval. Naturally, this concern has been extended to the digital and tech realm as well. With the majority of cloud and software providers based either in the United States or China, the EU finds itself at a considerable disadvantage vis-à-vis its competitors. The fact that it is importing most of its digital tech and infrastructure also means that vast amounts of EU data flow via foreign servers. And this is not limited to private citizens only, but also to local and national public administration. The vulnerabilities that these dependencies carry with them have increasingly prompted political leaders and industry representatives to call for the creation and transfer towards EU-based solutions. At this year’s Munich Security Conference, both President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and EU Tech Commissioner Henna Virkkunen underlined the need for Europe to become more independent in its control over digital infrastructure if it wants to be resilient in the years to come. And the reason behind this is clear: data is power. The countries that host the largest amount of data centres and hold the largest share of the market essentially hold a ‘kill switch’ that could prove disastrous for the EU. As geopolitical alliances become more unreliable, the EU’s present tech dependencies run the risk of being weaponised against its institutions and citizens.
Feasibility and Challenges of EU-Based Solutions
So what can the EU do to wean itself off its reliance on foreign tech? While a complete decoupling of the EU from both foreign servers and foreign tech seems unlikely in today’s interconnected society, it might not be necessary. Regarding AI, for example, a hybrid approach has been proposed as the most feasible one, ensuring the sovereignty of critical sectors such as health and defence, while allowing for more leeway in its use for commercial purposes. In sum, what matters most is that the EU starts effectively diminishing its dependence by both strategically diversifying its providers and nourishing its own technological base. Ultimately, a Union that encourages its countries to invest in research, creating strong pipelines between universities and industry, is made stronger and more resilient. What matters most, though, is that public institutions lead the way. Some of the most recent examples include France’s decision to ditch American platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams for its own ‘Visio’ platform by 2027, as well as the decision by the German Bundesland Schleswig-Holstein to ban Microsoft programmes from its state administration, preferring open-source solutions instead.
The Way Forward
In a world where big tech powers can shape and influence other countries’ political outcomes, it is essential that the digital infrastructure of the EU becomes a clear representation of its citizens’ democratic will. For if the digital space is one we increasingly inhabit in our everyday lives, then it is crucial that our rights as citizens are respected in it. And, while disruptive technology has undoubtedly facilitated our daily lives, convenience should never come at the cost of sacrificing the societal good.
