top of page

Europe’s Cybersecurity Crisis Explained: Dependence on US Giants Leaves Continent Exposed

Europe is facing an unprecedented digital crossroads. As technology accelerates globally, the European Union (EU) has found itself trailing far behind the United States in critical areas of digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, and cloud computing. This lag has created what leading cybersecurity experts describe as a profound loss of control over the internet, raising urgent questions about Europe’s ability to defend against cyber threats, foster homegrown innovation, and maintain strategic autonomy in an increasingly digital world. The EU’s Digital Dependence on US Tech Giants Miguel De Bruycker, Director of Belgium’s Centre for Cybersecurity, bluntly stated, “We’ve lost the whole cloud. We have lost the internet, let’s be honest.” According to De Bruycker, US technology companies, including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google, dominate the European cloud market, leaving the continent dependent on foreign systems for data storage, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence frameworks that underpin modern cyber defenses. Over 70 percent of European cloud infrastructure is controlled by US firms, creating critical exposure to external geopolitical and legal pressures. European efforts to store sensitive data entirely within EU borders remain largely aspirational, constrained by the extraterritorial reach of US legislation such as the Cloud Act and FISA 702. The dependence on non-European infrastructure is more than a logistical issue; it undermines Europe’s ability to shape a sovereign digital ecosystem that is resilient, competitive, and secure. Geopolitical Implications of Digital Dependence Europe’s reliance on American digital infrastructure leaves the continent vulnerable in multiple dimensions: Strategic Autonomy – EU law enforcement and critical services rely on systems controlled outside the bloc, limiting their independent operational capacity. Geopolitical Risk – US legislative instruments can compel companies to provide data held anywhere in the world, effectively bypassing European legal frameworks. Innovation Gap – European firms lack the scale and investment necessary to compete with US hyperscalers, slowing progress in AI, cloud computing, and cybersecurity technologies. De Bruycker highlights the historical analogy of Airbus, a European initiative to counterbalance American aerospace dominance. He suggests that the EU should adopt a similar collaborative approach in cybersecurity and digital infrastructure, creating large-scale, multinational projects to regain technological sovereignty. Regulatory Bottlenecks and Innovation Challenges While US dominance poses structural challenges, European regulations may also unintentionally hinder innovation. The AI Act, designed to govern the development of artificial intelligence within the EU, is viewed by some experts as a potential obstacle to competitive progress. By enforcing stringent compliance requirements, the regulation may slow the pace at which European startups can develop AI technologies. Compliance costs for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may divert resources from innovation and scaling initiatives. De Bruycker argues that a more productive strategy would prioritize investment in homegrown capabilities rather than focusing solely on restricting US hyperscalers. European governments could incentivize private-sector initiatives in cloud computing, digital identification, and cybersecurity, providing the necessary scale and resources to compete internationally. The Cybersecurity Threat Landscape in Europe The loss of digital sovereignty is not merely a theoretical problem. Belgium, home to EU institutions and NATO headquarters, has faced repeated hybrid cyber attacks, often linked to Russian actors. In 2025 alone, Belgium experienced five waves of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks targeting multiple organizations simultaneously. Attacks were characterized by high-volume traffic floods, temporarily disabling online services for government agencies and businesses. While data theft was limited, the frequency and coordination of these attacks underscore Europe’s vulnerability. De Bruycker notes that these cyber threats often correlate with political events, such as anti-Russian statements by EU representatives. While the Kremlin’s direct involvement remains uncertain, the reliance on American cloud infrastructure played a critical role in mitigating the impact of attacks, highlighting both Europe’s dependence and its exposure. Economic and Strategic Costs of Digital Dependence The EU’s dependence on US tech firms has broader economic and strategic implications: Loss of Competitive Edge – By outsourcing critical digital infrastructure, European companies are excluded from emerging markets for cloud and AI technologies. Financial Leakage – Significant revenue flows out of the EU to American hyperscalers, reducing funds available for local innovation and R&D investment. Reduced Resilience – In scenarios of geopolitical tension, Europe’s dependence could hinder its ability to maintain uninterrupted digital operations. A structured, large-scale initiative akin to Airbus could address these challenges, pooling expertise, capital, and political will to build robust digital infrastructure entirely within Europe. Emerging European Initiatives in Digital Infrastructure Some European companies are attempting to reduce dependency on US systems. Notable examples include: OVHcloud (France) – Providing private and public cloud solutions tailored to European regulatory standards. Schwarz Digital (Germany) – Offering cloud and data center solutions focused on sovereignty and compliance. While promising, these initiatives remain limited in scale and capacity. Without coordinated EU-level support, they are unlikely to rival the technical and economic power of US hyperscalers. Strategic Recommendations for EU Digital Sovereignty Experts propose a multifaceted approach to reclaiming digital sovereignty: Investment in Homegrown Cloud Infrastructure – Establish large-scale European cloud services with guaranteed data residency and compliance. Collaborative AI and Cybersecurity Projects – Foster multinational initiatives to pool research, talent, and resources. Balanced Regulation – Streamline AI and data regulations to encourage innovation without compromising security. Public-Private Partnerships – Incentivize private companies to invest in scalable, European-controlled digital ecosystems. Resilience Planning – Develop strategies to mitigate the risks of foreign-dominated infrastructure during geopolitical crises. Expert Opinions De Bruycker emphasizes, “Instead of putting that focus on how we can stop the U.S. hyperscalers, maybe we put our energy in building up something by ourselves.” This underscores a proactive approach focused on capability development rather than obstruction. Industry analysts echo this sentiment, noting that the EU’s long-term competitiveness depends on strategic investments in digital infrastructure and AI, positioning Europe as both sovereign and globally competitive. Conclusion: Building Europe’s Digital Future Europe’s digital sovereignty crisis represents both a challenge and an opportunity. While current dependence on US technology giants exposes the continent to geopolitical, regulatory, and cybersecurity risks, a coordinated approach could reverse the trend. By fostering homegrown innovation, investing in cloud and AI infrastructure, and recalibrating regulatory frameworks, Europe has the potential to regain control over its digital destiny. As experts from the team at 1950.ai note, strategic foresight, innovation, and collaboration are critical. With visionary leadership and structured initiatives, Europe can achieve a resilient, competitive, and sovereign digital ecosystem. For further insights and expert analysis on digital sovereignty and cybersecurity, read more with Dr. Shahid Masood and the 1950.ai team. Further Reading / External References Cybernews, “Europe Has Lost the Internet, Belgium’s Cybersecurity Chief Warns,” January 2, 2026, https://cybernews.com/news/europe-internet-control-sovereignty-united-states/ Turkiye Today, “Europe Has Lost the Internet to US Tech Giants, Belgian Cyber Chief Warns,” January 2, 2026, https://www.turkiyetoday.com/business/europe-has-lost-the-internet-to-us-tech-giants-belgian-cyber-chief-warns-3212299?s=4

Europe is facing an unprecedented digital crossroads. As technology accelerates globally, the European Union (EU) has found itself trailing far behind the United States in critical areas of digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, and cloud computing. This lag has created what leading cybersecurity experts describe as a profound loss of control over the internet, raising urgent questions about Europe’s ability to defend against cyber threats, foster homegrown innovation, and maintain strategic autonomy in an increasingly digital world.


The EU’s Digital Dependence on US Tech Giants

Miguel De Bruycker, Director of Belgium’s Centre for Cybersecurity, bluntly stated,

“We’ve lost the whole cloud. We have lost the internet, let’s be honest.”

According to De Bruycker, US technology companies, including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google, dominate the European cloud market, leaving the continent dependent on foreign systems for data storage, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence frameworks that underpin modern cyber defenses.

  • Over 70 percent of European cloud infrastructure is controlled by US firms, creating critical exposure to external geopolitical and legal pressures.

  • European efforts to store sensitive data entirely within EU borders remain largely aspirational, constrained by the extraterritorial reach of US legislation such as the Cloud Act and FISA 702.

The dependence on non-European infrastructure is more than a logistical issue; it undermines Europe’s ability to shape a sovereign digital ecosystem that is resilient, competitive, and secure.


Geopolitical Implications of Digital Dependence

Europe’s reliance on American digital infrastructure leaves the continent vulnerable in multiple dimensions:

  1. Strategic Autonomy – EU law enforcement and critical services rely on systems controlled outside the bloc, limiting their independent operational capacity.

  2. Geopolitical Risk – US legislative instruments can compel companies to provide data held anywhere in the world, effectively bypassing European legal frameworks.

  3. Innovation Gap – European firms lack the scale and investment necessary to compete with US hyperscalers, slowing progress in AI, cloud computing, and cybersecurity technologies.


De Bruycker highlights the historical analogy of Airbus, a European initiative to counterbalance American aerospace dominance. He suggests that the EU should adopt a similar collaborative approach in cybersecurity and digital infrastructure, creating large-scale, multinational projects to regain technological sovereignty.


Regulatory Bottlenecks and Innovation Challenges

While US dominance poses structural challenges, European regulations may also unintentionally hinder innovation. The AI Act, designed to govern the development of artificial intelligence within the EU, is viewed by some experts as a potential obstacle to competitive progress.

  • By enforcing stringent compliance requirements, the regulation may slow the pace at which European startups can develop AI technologies.

  • Compliance costs for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may divert resources from innovation and scaling initiatives.


De Bruycker argues that a more productive strategy would prioritize investment in homegrown capabilities rather than focusing solely on restricting US hyperscalers. European governments could incentivize private-sector initiatives in cloud computing, digital identification, and cybersecurity, providing the necessary scale and resources to compete internationally.


The Cybersecurity Threat Landscape in Europe

The loss of digital sovereignty is not merely a theoretical problem. Belgium, home to EU institutions and NATO headquarters, has faced repeated hybrid cyber attacks, often linked to Russian actors. In 2025 alone, Belgium experienced five waves of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks targeting multiple organizations simultaneously.

  • Attacks were characterized by high-volume traffic floods, temporarily disabling online services for government agencies and businesses.

  • While data theft was limited, the frequency and coordination of these attacks underscore Europe’s vulnerability.


De Bruycker notes that these cyber threats often correlate with political events, such as anti-Russian statements by EU representatives. While the Kremlin’s direct involvement remains uncertain, the reliance on American cloud infrastructure played a critical role in mitigating the impact of attacks, highlighting both Europe’s dependence and its exposure.


Economic and Strategic Costs of Digital Dependence

The EU’s dependence on US tech firms has broader economic and strategic implications:

  1. Loss of Competitive Edge – By outsourcing critical digital infrastructure, European companies are excluded from emerging markets for cloud and AI technologies.

  2. Financial Leakage – Significant revenue flows out of the EU to American hyperscalers, reducing funds available for local innovation and R&D investment.

  3. Reduced Resilience – In scenarios of geopolitical tension, Europe’s dependence could hinder its ability to maintain uninterrupted digital operations.

A structured, large-scale initiative akin to Airbus could address these challenges, pooling expertise, capital, and political will to build robust digital infrastructure entirely within Europe.


Emerging European Initiatives in Digital Infrastructure

Some European companies are attempting to reduce dependency on US systems. Notable examples include:

  • OVHcloud (France) – Providing private and public cloud solutions tailored to European regulatory standards.

  • Schwarz Digital (Germany) – Offering cloud and data center solutions focused on sovereignty and compliance.

While promising, these initiatives remain limited in scale and capacity. Without coordinated EU-level support, they are unlikely to rival the technical and economic power of US hyperscalers.


Strategic Recommendations for EU Digital Sovereignty

Experts propose a multifaceted approach to reclaiming digital sovereignty:

  1. Investment in Homegrown Cloud Infrastructure – Establish large-scale European cloud services with guaranteed data residency and compliance.

  2. Collaborative AI and Cybersecurity Projects – Foster multinational initiatives to pool research, talent, and resources.

  3. Balanced Regulation – Streamline AI and data regulations to encourage innovation without compromising security.

  4. Public-Private Partnerships – Incentivize private companies to invest in scalable, European-controlled digital ecosystems.

  5. Resilience Planning – Develop strategies to mitigate the risks of foreign-dominated infrastructure during geopolitical crises.


De Bruycker emphasizes,

“Instead of putting that focus on how we can stop the U.S. hyperscalers, maybe we put our energy in building up something by ourselves.” This underscores a proactive approach focused on capability development rather than obstruction.

Industry analysts echo this sentiment, noting that the EU’s long-term competitiveness depends on strategic investments in digital infrastructure and AI, positioning Europe as both sovereign and globally competitive.


Building Europe’s Digital Future

Europe’s digital sovereignty crisis represents both a challenge and an opportunity. While current dependence on US technology giants exposes the continent to geopolitical, regulatory, and cybersecurity risks, a coordinated approach could reverse the trend. By fostering homegrown innovation, investing in cloud and AI infrastructure, and recalibrating regulatory frameworks, Europe has the potential to regain control over its digital destiny.


As experts from the team at 1950.ai note, strategic foresight, innovation, and collaboration are critical. With visionary leadership and structured initiatives, Europe can achieve a resilient, competitive, and sovereign digital ecosystem. For further insights and expert analysis on digital sovereignty and cybersecurity, read more with Dr. Shahid Masood and the 1950.ai team.


Further Reading / External References

  1. Cybernews, “Europe Has Lost the Internet, Belgium’s Cybersecurity Chief Warns,” January 2, 2026, https://cybernews.com/news/europe-internet-control-sovereignty-united-states/

  2. Turkiye Today, “Europe Has Lost the Internet to US Tech Giants, Belgian Cyber Chief Warns,” January 2, 2026, https://www.turkiyetoday.com/business/europe-has-lost-the-internet-to-us-tech-giants-belgian-cyber-chief-warns-3212299?s=4

Comments

bottom of page