The digital identity and integrity of the European Union are under pressure, due to influences from both hostile actors and perceived allies. How can Europe maintain its individuality?
“There is no doubt that foreign interference is a major challenge for Europe.” Christel Schaldemose (S&D, DK) immediately sets the tone during a press roundtable at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. By “foreign interference,” Schaldemose refers to the spreading of disinformation through social media to manipulate elections. “We have to tackle these problems, but in our way and with the tools we have.”
These are turbulent geopolitical times for the European Union. Not only hostile actors (read as: Russia) are putting pressure on digital identity. Even from countries we have historically considered allies (read as: the United States), friendship is no longer assured. The call that Europe will have to learn to stand on its own two feet is becoming louder and louder.
DSA: a success?
The roundtable is taking place almost exactly one year after the Digital Services Act went into full effect. Schaldemose makes an initial assessment. “I am proud of what we have accomplished with the DSA. We have put the onus on social media companies about what their algorithms do and do not show users.”
“Doesn’t the legislation lead to excessive removal of content on the platforms?” a journalist in the room commented. “That may not be the result, but if we do nothing, no one will trust each other in the public space,” Schaldemose replies. “If we can no longer trust what we see, democracy will come under pressure.”
Mika Aaltola (EPP, FI) picks up. “We need to set clear priorities. Enemy actors are trying to undermine our democracy, as we saw recently during elections in Romania and Moldova. Tunnel vision makes us vulnerable. By studying the tools of attackers, we can learn from them. Attacks are much more sophisticated, and AI offers new opportunities to scale up those activities.”
“To be effective, it is necessary for tools and resources to be concentrated at the European Commission, not scattered among the member states,” Schaldemose said. “Parliament pushes the Commission to follow the rules strictly. If the DSA proves not strong enough to fight disinformation, we will be open to new tools. But it is far too early to pass judgment on that.”
“I am particularly concerned about platforms that fall below the DSA’s treshold, such as Telegram. It’s those platforms that criminals are exploiting. That threat is far greater than claims that the DSA would curtail free speech,” Aaltola added.
read also
Europe’s digital identity crisis: “Regulation is not us-against-them”
Burden of FIMI
“Our fight is not only against disinformation,” opens Aude Maio-Coliche, chief communications officer of the European External Policy Agency (EEAS). “Rather, we speak of ‘FIMI,’ or foreign information manipulation and interference. Despite recent incidents, there has never been structural interference. This is a signal that Europe is ready to defend itself against attacks that threaten our values.”
Last year, the European Commission announced an initiative to build a “democratic shield” against those outside influences. Maio-Coliche explains more. “We have developed a ‘toolbox’ to respond appropriately to external threats. It starts with awareness: you must first know what is happening. A database has been developed with thousands of cases of manipulation that can be accessed.”
“Second, we need to build resilience. We are building a network of factcheckers inside and outside the EU, working with the major social media platforms during elections. We want to build a wall around ourselves, but also ensure that democracy can flourish elsewhere, so that our values are not devalued beyond our borders.”
So isn’t it problematic that Meta wants to stop factchecking on its platforms just now? “We don’t rely blindly on self-reporting: platforms should open themselves up to external audits,” says Schaldemose. “Factchecking is an important task: social media should be given the same responsibility as traditional media. Platforms are not obliged to use our tools, but then they should be able to demonstrate that they eliminate systemic risks.”
Us versus them
When necessary, the European Union gives itself a stick to beat with. “Regulation makes us strong against the big tech companies, but above all it serves to be able to impose sanctions on actors who are effectively guilty of manipulation,” says Maio-Coliche. Still, Europe will face a dilemma in the coming years: regulate more or less?
Just hours before the press conference in Strasbourg, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance had made a remarkable appearance at the AI summit some 500 km west in Paris. Vance not only prematurely proclaimed his country the world champion in AI, but also uttered threatening words to Europe. The Union may join the hand of the U.S., but only if it gives American companies free rein, Vance said succinctly.
read also
Vance: ‘U.S. is ultimate leader in AI, EU welcome to follow behind if it deregulates’
This is far from the first time that the United States has tried to weigh in on European technology policy, and large U.S. companies have been complaining for some time about the many regulations they have to abide by. However, the tone from Washington has changed: Trump and Vance do not necessarily consider the European Union a friend. Moreover, the same values no longer apply in the United States as in Europe.
Schaldemose just barely keeps her eyes from rolling into her eye socket when she is presented with Vance’s words. “The DSA is wrongly called a ‘monster.’ The political landscape is changing: the sentiment is that European regulations are meant ‘against’ American companies. It is not an us-against-them story: the DSA should not be blamed, but the platforms for not having a clear policy around moderation.”
“Maybe we can learn things from the United States on how to regulate in a less bureaucratic way,” admitted Schaldemose, only to sharpen her tone almost immediately. “But the message is clear: if you don’t want to follow our rules, leave Europe.”
During the AI Summit, however, the European Commission seems to be making a concession. The Commission is disbanding the AI liability law even before it goes into effect. Henna Virkkunen, responsible for EU digital policy, defended in Financial Times that “less bureaucracy” would also benefit European AI companies. “The summit laid a foundation for boosting investment and entrepreneurship in Europe,” Maio-Coliche said.
The DSA is wrongly called a “monster. Regulation is not against American companies.
Christel Schaldemose, VP European Parliament
On your own two feet
The harsh tone of Trump and Vance makes one thing clear: Europe needs to learn to stand more on its own digital feet. That insight seems to have permeated across institutions. “We cannot be dependent on other countries,” Schaldemose said.
“It starts with setting your own rules,” said Ulrich Ahle, CEO of the Gaia-X European Association, during an interview. “Companies are data-driven, so companies need to be able to share data with each other. That will only become more important with AI. AI needs enough reliable data to develop reliable services. Regulation creates a framework to set and implement rules. The highest level of security can only be guaranteed by companies that are not controlled outside the EU.”
read also
Europe’s digital identity crisis: “Regulation is not us-against-them”
“At the same time, we cannot ignore market conditions. Hyperscalers are dominating the market, while the share of European providers is declining. It is important to support European players, but we are going to have a hard time reversing that trend. Large European companies operate beyond borders: for them, global access to data is crucial. Data is not separate from cloud infrastructure, or as we say, data does not float on rainbows. We need hyperscalers to enable global access and support.”
“Digitization is a global evolution, we must not lose sight of that. Building a wall around our ecosystem is impossible for Europe. But Europe must stick to its own rules and make sure non-European providers accept them,” Ahle concludes.