A recent incident in Europe highlighted the risks of technological dependency: a manufacturer remotely limited the functionality of its own devices. The event involved inverters from the Chinese brand Deye, whose users suddenly found themselves unable to use energy generated by their home solar panels. Intelligence agencies in some countries had previously warned of overreliance on Chinese components—a concern that now appears more real than hypothetical.
This event, combined with ongoing uncertainty in U.S.-EU relations, has added urgency to the discussion around digital sovereignty.
Can the Transition from American Technologies Really Take 15–20 Years?
A user on X (formerly Twitter), commenting on geopolitical strategist Jacek Bartosiak’s profile, doubted that reducing reliance on American technology would take two decades. “Give me three years and decision-making power. In Polish public administration, the only American element left would be hardware. Saying we are dependent is just echoing Big Tech narratives designed to influence policymakers,” argued another participant in the discussion.
Experts have proposed practical steps for moving toward technological independence—and suggest that such a shift doesn’t have to take a decade.
Three Steps to a Successful and Timely Shift
Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s actions have raised questions about the trustworthiness of American partners in tech and cybersecurity. A lesser-discussed consequence of escalating tariff disputes between the U.S. and the EU is the rising cost of cybersecurity solutions, should such trade tensions affect licensing or services. In this context, digital services taxation has emerged in Europe as a potential leverage tool.
“We must ask: how protected would a company be if, say, the U.S. administration unilaterally decided to restrict or shut down access to cybersecurity services? That’s no longer political fiction,”
says Paweł Śmigielski, Country Manager at Stormshield.
In a report published in September 2024 by Mario Draghi, former ECB President, Europe’s dependence on non-EU digital technologies was estimated at around 80%—a figure that includes cybersecurity, which is currently dominated by U.S. and Israeli providers.
“At the organizational level, diversifying critical technologies will take years—not decades. This is because cybersecurity services are delivered via renewable licenses—covering UTM, firewalls, SIEM systems, and SOC support. That creates an opportunity to gradually switch to European alternatives, without burdening company budgets,”
Śmigielski adds.
While full independence may not be feasible or necessary, reducing dependence to 20–30% would be a solid strategic target. This would benefit both the organization and the EU by accelerating the development of European technologies while maintaining partnerships with global suppliers.
A Simple Three-Phase Strategy
- Assessment: Audit the current technology stack. Identify where and when European-made (including Polish) cybersecurity technologies can be implemented.
- Procurement Strategy: Include “origin of supplier” as a selection criterion, alongside standard factors like functionality, performance, certifications, and references.
- Implementation: Ensure effective roll-out supported by local specialists—especially those fluent in local languages.
Why the Global Transition Will Take Longer
The high-tech sector is highly globalized—and vulnerable to disruption. Chip design is dominated by American firms (Intel, AMD, Qualcomm) or the British ARM, but production happens largely in Asia. Europe’s strength lies in lithography machines, with Dutch-based ASML leading the field, yet the EU lacks significant semiconductor manufacturing capacity, which is essential for real digital sovereignty.
“Given these facts, moving away from American tech isn’t feasible in 3 or even 10 years—at least not on the scale of a nation or the entire EU,”
says Piotr Zielaskiewicz, Manager at DAGMA IT Security.
“It’s not just about the hardware; it’s also about retraining people. Imagine switching from Windows to Linux overnight—very few users would adapt easily.”
Aleksander Kostuch, engineer at Stormshield, agrees, noting that even the U.S. or China cannot achieve full independence.
“True self-sufficiency would require massive investments in factory infrastructure and skilled labor. You’d need a complete value chain—from R&D and design to manufacturing and IT deployment. That calls for coordinated action, financial support, and changes in EU regulation. It’s a long-term project.”
Europe’s Cybersecurity Sector Has Potential—But It’s Underestimated
Despite the dominance of U.S. and Israeli firms, European cybersecurity vendors already offer world-class solutions. Yet a myth persists that Europe is a digital “terra incognita.”
“The current uncertainty should be a wake-up call. We’re not doomed to rely on American or Israeli tech—although Big Tech tries to convince policymakers otherwise,”
says Zielaskiewicz.
Investing in the European tech industry makes sense: it strengthens the EU’s resilience against future supply chain disruptions—be it from geopolitics or pandemics. This goal underpins the European Chips Act (ECA), aimed at building a robust EU semiconductor ecosystem.
“We’re already seeing results. Still, the fact that companies like Intel (U.S.) and TSMC (Taiwan) are leading investments in EU factories shows how deeply interconnected the ecosystem remains,”
concludes Aleksander Kostuch.
