Europe would need to spend approximately $3 trillion over the next decade to achieve digital independence and phase out US and Asian technology providers, according to a report by Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Analyst Mandeep Singh.

This projected capital outlay encompasses the development of cloud infrastructure, the construction of artificial intelligence data centers, the training of large language models, and investments across other technological domains.

Singh’s report noted that guaranteed demand generated through a “Buy European” mechanism could serve as the single most powerful leverage point for the EU to achieve its software sovereignty objectives.

A prominent example of this shift centers on Palantir, the US-based technology firm founded in 2003 by Peter Thiel. In June, French Armed Forces Minister Sébastien Lecornu announced that France would terminate its partnership with Palantir, despite having three years remaining on its contract with the French domestic intelligence service, the DGSI. Lecornu stated: “France must possess its own tools.”

The announcement followed a decision by US President Donald Trump to restrict access to leading AI models belonging to Anthropic. Lecornu identified ChapsVision, a domestic competitor, as the replacement for Palantir.

Palantir executives were caught off guard by the development, according to Bloomberg. One company official accused Lecornu of turning critical security decisions into a “Hollywood feud.” The official noted that the contract with the DGSI, France’s internal intelligence agency, had only recently been renewed for a three-year period.

In the UK, Member of Parliament Chi Onwurah proposed terminating Palantir’s £330 million ($440 million) contract with the National Health Service (NHS).

“They have a political agenda,” Onwurah said. “Palantir represents an unacceptable vulnerability in our digital infrastructure.”

Bloomberg reported that Palantir’s position in Europe is weakening, with security agencies in Germany and Poland actively seeking local providers. The Dutch Defense Minister pledged to replace Palantir with European vendors. In July, two British startups founded by former Palantir employees secured funding aimed directly at challenging their former employer.

At the center of these developments, ChapsVision has secured contracts across French government ministries and public institutions. According to Bloomberg Intelligence estimates, the DGSI contract alone is worth at least €100 million. Politico reported in May that Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the BfV, selected ChapsVision to replace its existing arrangement with Palantir.

In an interview, ChapsVision Chief Executive Officer Silvano Sansoni said: “Our objective is to become a European champion.”

Sansoni stated that the company is currently in talks with all sensitive clients in Poland, adding that Germany represents its primary strategic focus in the near term. Acknowledging that ChapsVision cannot immediately replace Palantir’s full capabilities for French intelligence, Sansoni said: “The technology is complex, so we will not replace Palantir tomorrow.”

Industry experts interviewed by Bloomberg highlighted potential risks associated with the sovereign push. Retired General Richard Barrons, former commander of the UK’s Joint Forces Command, remarked: “Locking Palantir out would be madness. You cut yourself off from world-leading capability.”

Nick Patience, an analyst at The Futurum Group, observed that achieving 100% sovereignty in an interconnected world is unlikely. Patience pointed to ChapsVision’s partnership with Alcatel Lucent Enterprise, a company majority-owned by the Chinese state-owned enterprise China Huaxin.

Bloomberg reported that following Trump’s decision to ban foreign access to the Fable 5 and Mythos 5 AI models, Europe and Canada resolved to urgently develop sovereign AI capabilities to avoid dependency on foreign policy decisions.

In early June, the Financial Times reported, citing sources, that the US National Security Agency (NSA) could deploy Anthropic’s Claude Mythos model to execute cyber operations.

One source noted that the system could be utilized to penetrate network infrastructure in countries such as China or Iran.

The European Commission on Thursday fined Google €890 million for anti-competitive practices in breach of the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA).

The world’s leading search engine routinely displays results that primarily benefit its own enterprise in prime positions, while links belonging to rival companies appear further down the page.

In some instances, Google presents an in-house “AI-powered overview” designed to inform the user directly.

In other searches, the engine responds first with its proprietary mapping service, Google Maps, or with “sponsored products”—advertisements paid for by businesses seeking top-tier placement in search results.

While this structure serves Google’s commercial interests, it can disadvantage consumers and competing firms. Alternative mapping services or shopping portals, for example, are denied privileged access to Google’s vast user base.

The EU principally accuses Google of favoring its own digital offerings, such as Google Shopping, within Google Search.

“Similar third-party services do not enjoy the same visibility,” the Commission stated, calling for greater fairness in search indexing.

EU Competition Commissioner Teresa Ribera emphasized: “The best products should stand out because they are superior, not because they belong to the company operating the search engine.”

Brussels further accuses the tech giant of restricting developers from offering applications—some of which are less expensive—on alternative app stores outside of Google Play.

Through the imposition of this fine, the Commission is demanding that Google cease both infractions of the DMA.

Google sharply criticized the financial penalty on Thursday. Kent Walker, Google’s President of Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer, argued that “this enforcement of the DMA once again undermines services that people rely on every day.”

The ruling, according to the company, will force it to strip away search features that European users value, such as integrated hotel price comparisons.

“This is not fair competition; it is a degradation of product quality driven by a small group of self-interested complainants,” Walker asserted.

Google contended that when users search for flights, for instance, they expect to enter specific dates and instantly review real-time pricing and availability.

The company plans to examine the decision thoroughly and stated that it retains the option to appeal.

In principle, Google holds the legal right to challenge the fine in court. Theoretically, the litigation could reach the Court of Justice of the European Union following a prolonged legal procedure.

The “gatekeeper problem”—arising when dominant platforms such as Google or Apple serve as primary entry points to the internet—has long driven concern among policymakers and consumer advocates.

“When gatekeepers prioritize their own services, it causes direct harm to rivals and consumers alike,” said Miika Blinn of the Federation of German Consumer Organisations.

The consumer advocate also drew attention to the extensive volume of personal data users are compelled to surrender to dominant digital gatekeepers.

Enacted in 2023, the DMA aims to prevent systemic tech gatekeepers from favoring their own proprietary products over comparable third-party services.

The legislation is also designed to guarantee that consumers can freely select their preferred web browsers and search engines, whether they operate an Apple device or a smartphone running Google’s Android operating system.

Through these measures, the EU seeks to prevent tech conglomerates from leveraging market dominance in one segment to expand control over adjacent sectors, continuously compounding their market power.

The regulatory framework has drawn fierce criticism from US corporations and President Donald Trump.

Apple, for instance, mounted a legal challenge contesting its designation as a “gatekeeper,” but recently lost the case before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, urged US President Trump to take international action against governments attempting to impose regulatory restrictions on technology firms.

Following an EU fine imposed on Elon Musk’s social media platform X, the US administration went so far as to threaten retaliatory measures.

Trump warned Brussels that he would view financial penalties levied against US tech companies as tariffs and would respond with retaliatory tariffs.

Reports indicate that European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen repeatedly delayed the DMA fine against Google to avoid alienating the US, a key and challenging trade partner.

Consequently, many industry observers view the €890 million penalty against Google as a critical litmus test of whether the EU can enforce its digital regulations despite intense foreign resistance.

The Google proceeding also illustrates the lengthy timeline of EU enforcement actions. Two years and approximately four months elapsed between the formal initiation of the case and the announcement of the fine.

For this reason, civil society groups including LobbyControl and Corporate Europe Observatory had voiced complaints prior to the announcement, alleging that the EU had “significantly delayed” enforcement of the DMA.

In 2017, under a separate antitrust proceeding, the European Commission fined Google and its parent company Alphabet €2.4 billion for favoring its Google Shopping service over rival aggregators such as Idealo.

That legal dispute subsequently advanced to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which upheld the €2.4 billion penalty in late 2024.

Michael Kretschmer, a key ally of Friedrich Merz, has ignited a fierce political debate after suggesting that conservatives should cooperate with Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Kretschmer, the premier of Saxony and a prominent member of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), is directly challenging Merz’s insistence on maintaining a political “firewall” (Brandmauer) against the surging AfD ahead of critical September elections that could see the party capture a state premiership for the first time.

“Those who still talk about firewalls have not recognized the signs of the times. We must talk to everyone who wants to talk,” Kretschmer, who heads a minority government in Saxony, said in an interview with the newspaper Handelsblatt earlier this week.

According to Politico, Kretschmer’s remarks have inflamed the very tensions Merz has spent months working to contain.

Merz refuses to cooperate with the far right, citing Germany’s Nazi past. However, political realities in eastern Germany are exerting mounting pressure on him to reconsider this stance.

Polls indicate that the AfD has a viable chance of securing an absolute majority in Saxony-Anhalt on Sept. 6, while also being positioned for strong performances in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin later that month.

At the national level, Politico’s Poll of Polls places the AfD as the most popular party with 28% support, compared to 22% for the Christian Democrats.

For now, Merz remains firm in his position, maintaining that Germany bears a “special historical responsibility” and therefore cannot follow the path of other EU member states where the far right collaborates with the centrist mainstream.

Speaking to reporters at a news conference, the Chancellor stated:

“An extreme-right party entering government in Germany carries an entirely different meaning than if it were to happen in another country. This is tied to our history, which is why it serves as neither a benchmark, an example, nor a lesson for me to draw from. It is, quite simply, a different situation. I will do everything in my power to prevent this in Germany.”

Instead, Merz argued that the government’s objective must be to foster an environment in which the far right can be defeated.

“Between now and Sept. 6, we will work to facilitate and ensure stable political conditions in both Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania,” Merz said.

Yet the reality on the ground in the campaign battlegrounds reveals that the AfD leads all rival parties by a wide margin in the eastern states of Saxony-Anhalt (41%) and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (36%).

The territory of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) has long functioned as a stronghold for the right. It is also where the AfD’s party apparatus and policy positions are at their most radical.

Regional party branches in four of the five eastern German states are officially classified as “extremist right-wing” organizations by domestic intelligence agencies.

In Saxony-Anhalt, polling places the party within range of winning an absolute parliamentary majority.

Such an outcome would enable the party to assume state-level power for the first time since its founding in 2013.

Even if the AfD falls short of an absolute majority in Saxony-Anhalt, Merz’s conservatives face a difficult political dynamic in September: to keep the far right from power, they would be forced to cooperate with the Left Party (Die Linke).

The Left Party is also exceptionally strong in the east, and conservatives continue to maintain a “firewall” against it as well, anchored in a formal 2018 party convention resolution.

Addressing potential cooperation with the Left Party last week, Merz said: “We have clear party congress resolutions on this matter, and I have no reason to doubt that we will abide by them.”

However, regional politicians within his own party are increasingly questioning whether such pledges can be sustained given the strength of parties at both ends of the political spectrum.

Kretschmer’s comments are widely viewed as an attempt to initiate a debate on how to govern after the September elections without abandoning campaign pledges entirely or further damaging the CDU’s credibility.

This initiative has met resistance from party leadership in Berlin.

Steffen Bilger, a deputy leader of the CDU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, told Deutschlandfunk on Thursday:

“We are currently in the middle of a fierce political struggle in three states, specifically with or against the AfD. Rather than opening up discussions of this nature right now, that is where our focus should remain.”

Meanwhile, politicians from the Social Democratic Party (SPD) have demanded clarity from their federal coalition partners.

The SPD’s lead candidate for the Berlin election urged the CDU to “state clearly” whether it still rules out regional cooperation with the AfD, while simultaneously calling on the party to open itself to the far left.

Steffen Krach, the SPD head of the Hanover region, said: “The CDU must finally acknowledge that it can cooperate with the Left Party, because it is already doing so,” pointing to the minority governments the party formed in Saxony and Thuringia.

“Anyone who demonizes the Left Party today and equates it with the AfD is deceiving the electorate,” the SPD politician added.

For its part, the AfD has adopted a composed stance amid the ongoing controversy, declaring through a spokesperson to German news outlets that the party remains open to talks with anyone willing to engage.

However, Torben Braga, an AfD lawmaker from the eastern state of Thuringia, argued that given the party’s current strength, supporting a minority government in Saxony-Anhalt after the September elections would not serve its strategic interests.

“I do not understand why a party like the AfD, which is polling near an absolute majority, should settle for enabling a minority government to stay in power by providing a majority without participating in executive decisions,” Braga said. “That would not be in the interest of our voters.”