The Conversation AI
The EU has a long-established reputation as a global standard setter, and as a reliable partner for international regulatory cooperation, especially in the digital field. But the second Trump administration is disrupting these dynamics.
In the last decade, several US big tech companies were scrutinised and sanctioned by EU data protection watchdogs for abusing customers’ personal data. Meanwhile, other nations have adopted digital regulations that are modelled on the EU’s GDPR. They reason that doing so will enhance privacy protections domestically while also strengthening their economic presence in the EU. The list of these countries keeps increasing, and includes countries traditionally operating on a protectionist agenda, such as China and Brazil.
The same had been true for artificial intelligence. Regulations on the development and use of AI drawn up under the presidency of Joe Biden signalled a degree of alignment with Brussels. The EU’s approach focuses on managing the risks stemming from AI – a goal that appeared to be seriously embraced by the US, too.
But shortly after arriving in office in January, Trump signed several executive orders “removing barriers to American leadership in artificial intelligence”. The Trump administration’s stated aim is to “achieve and maintain unquestioned and unchallenged global technological dominance”. This includes a new stance on AI that concentrates exclusively on economic and competitiveness arguments. Concerns around the risks of that technology, which the EU framework puts at its core, are no longer even part of the conversation in the US.
Trump has also launched an investigation into the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA) as part of a wider exercise to see if “remedial actions” (for which, read tariffs) are needed in response to the taxes and regulations levied at US tech companies. EU acts seek to combat concentrations and abuses of digital power and the risks of social media platforms. The US is flexing its muscles, while the EU is exposed to a form of regulatory blackmail.
These are but a few examples of the new US government’s remarkably deregulatory approach concerning digital issues, despite the increasing global consensus around the risks and perils in this field.
The fallout
The geopolitics of digital regulation may push the EU towards an under-enforcement of its own digital rules so that it can continue to rely on US tech companies and avoid tariffs. The recent US executive orders may cause a chilling effect on the enforcement of the DMA and the DSA, or a potential lax application of the EU AI Act that requires developers of AI systems to respect a series of standards for their products to be lawfully marketed in the EU. Worryingly, some weeks ago the EU withdrew the proposed EU directive on AI liability, which introduced rules on how people could claim compensation for damages caused by AI systems.
Handing unfettered power to privately owned digital companies sits uneasily both with the European tradition of antitrust rules and consumer protection, as well as the values of EU constitutionalism that emerged in the aftermath of the second world war. The conquests of democracy and its values could be significantly eroded in a digital world that is becoming increasingly unequal. What is more, capitulation in the face of regulatory blackmail would equate to a relinquishment of global influence for the EU. The EU regulatory tradition and role as international standard-setter would be undermined were the EU to give in to US pressure.
Regardless of legal traditions and democratic values, any regulator should put people first when drawing up the rules that will govern the digital space – not the interests of a handful of tech companies. Jurisdictions that do not pursue policies ensuring a safe digital world for ordinary people are effectively declaring where their interests reside – not with the many but in the power and wealth of the few.
