“European Tech First” | US strategy paper reveals: Is Washington planning Europe’s targeted digital dependence?
Xpert Pre-Release
Language selection 📢
Published on: January 28, 2026 / Updated on: January 28, 2026 – Author: Konrad Wolfenstein
“European Tech First” | US strategy paper reveals: Is Washington planning Europe’s deliberate digital dependence – Image: Xpert.Digital
IT association sounds the alarm: "US technology must be removed from our critical infrastructure"
The end of digital naivety: Why Europe must now emancipate itself from US tech
"With the publication of the US National Security Strategy 2025, the goal of establishing monopolies for American technologies in non-American markets and deepening strategic dependencies was recorded for the first time in an official government document."
For a long time, warnings about American technological dominance were considered a niche topic for data privacy activists and concerned computer scientists. But in 2026, the tide has turned: What once began as a theoretical debate has become the harsh reality of European security and economic policy. Storm clouds are gathering, because Europe's digital sovereignty is no longer threatened solely by market forces, but by an openly articulated geopolitical strategy by the US aimed at cementing technological monopolies.
The situation is both paradoxical and dangerous: While European companies and authorities transfer billions to hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, they find themselves in a legal dead end. The US Cloud Act undermines European data protection laws and makes even data stored in Frankfurt accessible to US authorities. At the same time, cases like the aggressive pricing policies following the Broadcom acquisition demonstrate how costly dependence on individual providers can become. Europe is currently paying not only with its data but also with its economic competitiveness—a situation that critics increasingly refer to as "digital vassalage.".
But resistance is stirring. With calls for "European Tech First" in public procurement and massive investments in projects like Gaia-X, the continent is attempting to turn the tide. The German Informatics Society and leading political voices are now demanding what long seemed unthinkable: the consistent prioritization of domestic technologies in critical sectors. The following article analyzes the profound legal conflicts, Washington's geopolitical calculations, and the concrete steps Europe must now take to avoid becoming a digital colony.
Suitable for:
Digital self-defense instead of Silicon Valley dependence: Europe between independence and digital vassalage
The European debate on digital sovereignty reached a new level of urgency in 2026. What initially began as expert discussions among computer scientists has now become a central question of European national interest. The German Informatics Society (Gesellschaft für Informatik) speaks of the necessity of excluding US technology from Europe's critical infrastructure – not for nationalist reasons, but based on a sober analysis of security policy. This position, initially perceived as radical, is increasingly being recognized as legitimate by governments, business associations, and European institutions.
The conflict is not new, but it has reached a new level. With the publication of the US National Security Strategy 2025, the goal of establishing monopolies for American technologies in non-American markets and deepening strategic dependencies was enshrined for the first time in an official government document. This is not speculation, but declared government policy. At the same time, the data sovereignty of European citizens is being structurally threatened by the US Cloud Act – a law that allows American authorities to access data physically stored on European servers and subject to European law.
Suitable for:
The legal conflict: When two legal systems clash
The core problem is not technically complex, but fundamentally legal. The Cloud Act of 2018 obligates US technology companies to hand over data at the request of US authorities – regardless of where that data is physically stored. A server containing customer data in Frankfurt, operated by Microsoft or AWS, is therefore not subject to German or European law, but can be accessed through a US warrant. This reality directly contradicts the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which explicitly states in Article 48 that data transfers to third countries are only permissible if mutual legal assistance treaties exist.
The Schrems II ruling by the European Court of Justice in 2020 highlighted this conflict: The Court declared the EU-US Privacy Shield invalid, arguing that US surveillance laws do not provide adequate protection for European citizens. Since then, there has been no legally sound basis for transferring personal data to the US – yet European companies and authorities carry out precisely these data transfers daily in order to use US cloud services.
This puts European organizations in a systematic legal dead end. Anyone using US cloud services risks having sensitive data, such as health information, financial data, or personal information of European citizens, accessed via US warrants – without informing the individuals concerned, without involving European courts, and without an international mutual legal assistance agreement. Companies face a real dilemma: compliance with the Cloud Act means violating the GDPR; compliance with the GDPR means violating US law. Europe has not solved this problem, but has merely negotiated technical compromises. Microsoft's new "Sovereignty Cloud" in Germany and France promises local data control, but technical control remains with the US parent company.
Suitable for:
The geopolitical calculation: Monopolies as a strategy
The US under the current administration has clearly articulated its strategic intentions. The National Security Strategy 2025 explicitly states the goal of creating monopolies for American technologies and deepening European dependencies. This is not economic competition, but a geopolitical strategy. If the European Court of Justice considers digital infrastructure a systemic risk to a state's autonomy, then dependence on foreign tech monopolies is indeed a sovereignty issue.
Understanding this calculation requires looking at the reality of the European cloud market. Approximately 70% of the European cloud market is controlled by three US companies: Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud. This concentration is unparalleled in any other sector of the European economy. A medium-sized company that outsources its data to the AWS cloud effectively loses control over its digital infrastructure. A hospital that stores patient data in Microsoft Azure cannot guarantee that this data will not be accessed through a US warrant.
Even more problematic is the lock-in effect created by long-term contracts and proprietary technologies. The recent example of Broadcom and VMware clearly illustrates this logic: Broadcom acquired VMware for approximately $61 billion. Shortly thereafter, the company implemented drastic price increases, forced long-standing customers into multi-year contracts, and radically altered licensing models. For European cloud providers that had offered their services based on VMware, this meant price increases of up to ten times. The industry association CISPE warned the European Commission about this development—the Commission nevertheless approved the merger. Since then, European organizations have been paying the price for becoming strategically dependent.
The market instrument: The power of public procurement
This also illustrates why public procurement is becoming a key lever. The European public sector spends approximately €2.6 trillion annually on goods and services – equivalent to about 15% of the EU's gross domestic product. No single industry, no company, and no market operates independently of this purchasing power. If the EU and its member states were to decide to exclude US technology from public procurement in critical sectors, this would have immediate market repercussions.
The “European Tech First” principle would mean that, given equal suitability, digital sovereign solutions from companies based in the EU or the EEA would be awarded contracts. This would not exclude all US providers, but rather reorient the market. For critical infrastructures – administrative clouds, 5G core networks, energy supply, healthcare – European alternatives, or at least providers operating under European law, should be given preference.
Is this protectionist? The US itself practices a strict "Buy American" policy. The Defense Production Act obligates US authorities to preferentially purchase from American suppliers. Europe's exclusion of US tech from sensitive sectors would not be protectionism, but self-preservation – and legally within the same framework as the US itself.
Our EU and Germany expertise in business development, sales and marketing
Our EU and Germany expertise in business development, sales and marketing - Image: Xpert.Digital
Industry focus: B2B, digitalization (from AI to XR), mechanical engineering, logistics, renewable energies and industry
More about it here:
A topic hub with insights and expertise:
- Knowledge platform on the global and regional economy, innovation and industry-specific trends
- Collection of analyses, impulses and background information from our focus areas
- A place for expertise and information on current developments in business and technology
- Topic hub for companies that want to learn about markets, digitalization and industry innovations
Digital colony or sovereign power? Europe's fate is being decided now
The European reality: From dependency to dependency
The debate is often dismissed with the argument that Europe currently has no real alternatives. This is partly true and partly false. Yes, European cloud providers like OVHcloud, Scaleway, Hetzner, or Open Telekom Cloud cannot yet offer the full service portfolio of AWS or Azure. They may offer less specialized AI services, less global redundancy, and less comprehensive APIs. However, for many use cases, especially for public administrations, government agencies, and regulated industries, these European solutions are perfectly adequate.
Moreover, European cloud providers like Hetzner impress with radical cost efficiency and GDPR compliance by design. The Open Telekom Cloud is operated by Deutsche Telekom with state-of-the-art data centers in Germany and the Netherlands. Scaleway focuses on developers and offers high-performance GPU infrastructure at competitive prices. There isn't a single European hyperscaler, but there is a network of specialized, competent providers operating under European law.
The point is not that these providers are technically identical to AWS. The point is that they would allow European organizations to place their data and systems under European legal jurisdiction. That is the crucial difference.
Suitable for:
Gaia-X and the federal alternative
An often overlooked aspect of this debate is the Gaia-X project. Since 2020, the European Union has been working on a federal, interoperable data infrastructure. Gaia-X is not an attempt to build a European “super-cloud provider”—that would have violated the logic of market competition and would also be economically nonsensical. Instead, Gaia-X creates standardization and certification for sovereign data management. It establishes common rules by which European (and also international) cloud providers can demonstrate that they respect European data sovereignty.
The project has transitioned from an abstract vision to operational reality. Over 180 sectoral data spaces are in the implementation phase – in health, industry, mobility, and energy. The Gaia-X Hub Germany collaborates with municipalities and companies. A practical example: The German municipality of Etteln was the first European municipality to establish a “Community-X” data space, where municipal data (mobility, energy, environment) can be exchanged independently. This doesn't operate on AWS or Azure, but on European infrastructure.
What Gaia-X does is fundamental: it invalidates the excuse "There are no European alternatives" in practical reality. It demonstrates that sovereign digital infrastructure works and creates added value.
The investments and the political will
Germany and France jointly held a summit in 2025 to strengthen digital sovereignty. The result: over €12 billion in additional investment in European digital infrastructure was mobilized. Chancellor Merz emphasized that the state must lead the way and implement European digital solutions in public administration. This is not rhetoric, but a policy.
These investments are flowing into supercomputing (Alice Recoque in France, Jupiter in Germany), AI factories, and the acceleration of Gaia-X. The European procurement reform, expected in the second quarter of 2026, will link these infrastructure investments to procurement rules. This means that public authorities will buy from European suppliers, creating markets for European providers, generating revenue for these companies, which they can then use to invest and innovate.
This is no coincidence, nor is it a romantic notion. It's proven industrial policy. Japan, South Korea, and China all became tech powerhouses because their countries first opened their own markets to domestic suppliers, creating national champions that later became internationally competitive. Europe can do the same – but only if it has the political courage.
The services balance deficit: Money is flowing out of Europe
An often overlooked economic argument: Europe's services balance deficit with the US in digital services amounted to approximately €148 billion in 2024. This is an unprecedented transfer of funds. While European organizations pay US corporations for cloud services, software licenses, and data analysis, no comparable revenue flows back.
This is partly because the US consistently protects its own markets, not only through laws like the Defense Production Act, but also through investment protection regulations and regulatory measures. Europe has the same right. A consistent "European Tech First" policy in public procurement would reduce this deficit, strengthen local businesses, and keep tax revenues within the European economy.
The objection of the proponents and why it is wrong
There are established arguments against this policy that should be taken seriously. The first: It will be expensive. European providers may be 10, 20, or 30 percent more expensive than AWS. It should be noted that this is a deliberate price for sovereignty. Japan and South Korea have paid similar premiums to become independent. Furthermore, costs decrease with scale. If the EU mobilizes €2.6 trillion of public funds annually for European providers, markets will emerge that will reduce these costs.
The second argument: It jeopardizes innovation. American tech companies are innovative and fast. That's true. But European innovations don't arise from dependence, but from competition. When European cloud providers know they have access to the public market, they invest more in research and development. Gaia-X initiatives show that European organizations can indeed be innovative when they have the structural resources.
The third argument: US companies would sue. Probably. But the EU has the regulatory power to handle it. The Digital Markets Act against Google, Meta, and Amazon shows that the EU enforces its tech regulation. A procurement rule that favors European suppliers is less controversial from a regulatory perspective than a prohibitive ban.
Algorithms, Democracy and Information Control
One aspect of this debate is often overlooked: the control over the flow of information. The US, under its new administration, has explicitly stated in its National Security Strategy that it considers European regulation of digital platforms to be “censorship.” At the same time, European citizens are increasingly dependent on US platforms and US algorithms for their information.
This is not an abstract concept. If a handful of US corporations control which content is displayed to European citizens, which debates are algorithmically prioritized and which are not, then these corporations effectively wield power over European democratic discourse. This is a technological form of informational hegemony. An organization that entrusts its critical infrastructure to the cloud of US providers also implicitly relinquishes parts of its agency.
This does not mean that European solutions are automatically better or more democratic. But it does mean that European institutions have the opportunity to decide, under European rules, which platforms they use, which data they share, and under what legal oversight this happens.
What specifically needs to happen
The demands of the German Informatics Society (Gesellschaft für Informatik) are concrete and implementable. First: Adoption of the "European Tech First" principle in public tenders. This does not mean excluding US providers, but giving preference to European solutions when equally suitable. Second: Mandatory sovereignty checks before every procurement. Before purchasing from a US monopolist, it must be verified whether European alternatives exist.
Third: Exclusion of companies subject to the Cloud Act from critical infrastructure contracts. This is not a general ban, but a rule for security-critical sectors such as government, energy, and healthcare. Fourth: A ban on framework agreements with US monopolies. These contracts cement dependencies and often open the door to exorbitant prices, as in the VMware case.
Fifth: Massive investments in European digital infrastructure. The 12 billion euros from the Franco-German summit are a start, but not enough. A genuine European digital policy needs 50 billion euros plus per year for the next five to ten years.
The historic opportunity
Europe is at a crossroads. The US National Strategy 2025 has made it clear that the strategy is to deepen dependencies, secure monopolies, and establish digital sovereignty. Europe can either accept that it plays a subordinate role in this digital hierarchy, or it can seize the historic opportunity to secure its digital independence.
The path to achieving this is not theoretically overly complex. The tools exist: a large public market, a strong regulatory framework, a growing base of European providers, and a practical network of initiatives like Gaia-X. The only thing missing is consistent political will. The debate initiated by the German Informatics Society is not ideological, but strategically necessary.
Europe doesn't need to try to replicate AWS. Europe simply needs to decide that its data, its critical infrastructure, and its digital heritage remain under European control. This isn't anti-Americanism, but European self-assertion. And this debate can no longer be postponed—geopolitical reality won't allow it.
Your global marketing and business development partner
☑️ Our business language is English or German
☑️ NEW: Correspondence in your national language!
Konrad Wolfenstein
I would be happy to serve you and my team as a personal advisor.
You can contact me by filling out the contact form or simply call me on +49 7348 4088 965 (Munich) . My email address is: wolfenstein ∂ xpert.digital
I'm looking forward to our joint project.
☑️ SME support in strategy, consulting, planning and implementation
☑️ Creation or realignment of the digital strategy and digitalization
☑️ Expansion and optimization of international sales processes
☑️ Global & Digital B2B trading platforms
☑️ Pioneer Business Development / Marketing / PR / Trade Fairs
🎯🎯🎯 Benefit from Xpert.Digital's extensive, five-fold expertise in a comprehensive service package | BD, R&D, XR, PR & Digital Visibility Optimization
Benefit from Xpert.Digital's extensive, fivefold expertise in a comprehensive service package | R&D, XR, PR & Digital Visibility Optimization - Image: Xpert.Digital
Xpert.Digital has in-depth knowledge of various industries. This allows us to develop tailor-made strategies that are tailored precisely to the requirements and challenges of your specific market segment. By continually analyzing market trends and following industry developments, we can act with foresight and offer innovative solutions. Through the combination of experience and knowledge, we generate added value and give our customers a decisive competitive advantage.
More about it here:
