Transatlantic Illusion – How Europe Becomes a Supplier of Data and Investment

The celebration over the recent “deal” between the EU and Donald Trump seems like a macabre staging. While Brussels publicly celebrates “planning security in uncertain times,” the real power dynamics continue to shift westward – economically, technologically, politically. They speak of partnership, but what they mean is submission.

1. Economically: Tariffs on Steel, Billions Flowing

A quick glance at the numbers is enough to recognize the imbalance: Europeans commit to investing 750 billion euros in US energy – LNG, oil, and uranium. An additional 600 billion euros are set to flow into the US economy, rather than into our crumbling infrastructure or digital sovereignty. Meanwhile, European exports to the US will be subject to a 15 percent tariff – with few exceptions. German steel will continue to face 50 percent punitive tariffs. The “success” of this deal is that Trump reduced his initial threat of a 30 percent blanket tariff on everything to 15 percent. A bad deal that costs jobs and endangers production sites.

Source: [dpa / heise.de Summary of the Trade Agreement, July 2025]

2. Politically: Vulnerability as a Negotiation Strategy

Why did the EU sign this agreement? Not out of conviction, but out of fear. Fear of economic escalation. Fear that Trump might question NATO’s mutual defense clause or abandon Ukraine. Such threats were apparently enough to push EU representatives into a deal that unilaterally benefits the US and turns Europe into a capital provider – without a say, without balance. What was once an equal partnership has become a tribute system.

3. Technologically: Sovereignty Over Data Already Surrendered

While Europe subsidizes its industry into ruin and simultaneously pledges investments to the US, the same pattern unfolds in digital policy. The recent decision by the European Commission to allegedly make its Microsoft 365 usage compliant with data protection is another lesson in denial of reality. Yes, they have now defined “purpose limitation” and introduced “contractual addenda” to circumvent the Cloud Act. But no contractual construct in the world changes the fact that Microsoft, as a US company, is subject to the Cloud Act. US authorities can demand access to data stored in Microsoft clouds at any time if there is justified interest – even if the data is physically located in Europe. The Cloud Act makes this reality unmistakably clear.

Source: [EDPS Press Release, July 11, 2025 – “European Commission brings Microsoft 365 into compliance”]

The notion that mere contractual clauses can neutralize an extraterritorial law like the US CLOUD Act is dangerously naive. That the European Data Protection Supervisor now sells this state as a “joint success” says more about the power dynamics between Brussels and Redmond than about actual sovereignty.

4. Strategically: A Dangerous Dependency

Palantir, Microsoft, Google – the big contracts go overseas. Not because there are no European alternatives, but because there was never a serious effort to pursue them. Instead of investing in building our own structures, sensitive data and digital infrastructure are willingly thrown across the Atlantic. Meanwhile, the US increases tariffs, dictates energy policy, and drives us further into economic defensiveness. The question is no longer whether the US is a reliable partner. The question is how long we can afford this deal – financially, politically, and in terms of data protection.

Conclusion:

You cannot simultaneously demand economic independence while outsourcing strategic key areas like energy, software, and data infrastructure to the US. European cloud alternatives offer a way out of this dependency. This “deal” is not stabilization. It is a declaration of surrender – and further evidence that Europe has long forgotten its own role. Anyone who still believes Washington negotiates fairly has not understood the nature of power politics. And anyone who believes our data is safe in US clouds should urgently familiarize themselves with the Cloud Act – and with the reality that contracts are never more powerful than interests.