Exploring European digital sovereignty with Julia Pohle

Summary

Julia P. discusses the concept of digital sovereignty in Europe, tracing its evolution from an idea of internet independence to a complex term encompassing state control and individual rights. Highlighting the EU's push for a digital society based on European values, she critiques the term's broad use and lack of clear definition, suggesting it's a mix of geoeconomic, geopolitical, and normative ambitions. The talk touches on the EU's regulatory efforts to counter dependencies on foreign tech companies and infrastructures, aiming to shape a global digital order.

Takeaways

• 📢 Julia P., a senior researcher in the politics of digitalization, discusses the concept of digital sovereignty in Europe and its implications for governance and policy.
• 🌐 Julia's research focuses on the discourses and narratives in digital policy debates, particularly the shifting role of national states in global communication governance.
• 🏛 Julia is based in Berlin and is associated with various research centers, including the Center for Digitalization, Democracy, and Innovation.
• 🔑 The term 'digital sovereignty' has gained prominence in European policy discussions since 2013, but lacks a unified definition and is interpreted differently by various actors.
• 🔄 There has been a discursive shift in how sovereignty is conceptualized in relation to digital networks, moving from a placeless entity to one that states and governments should control.
• 🇪🇺 Digital sovereignty in Europe primarily emerged from France and Germany, with the German presidency of the EU Council in 2019 declaring it as the ultimate goal of EU digital governance.
• 💡 The concept of digital sovereignty is used to express aspirations for a digital future, rather than describing the current state of affairs.
• 🤔 Julia questions whether the motivations behind digital sovereignty are purely geoeconomic and geopolitical or if there are deeper normative ambitions at play.
• 🔑 The EU's push for digital sovereignty is driven by overcoming dependencies on external digital infrastructures, tech companies, and addressing structural inequalities.
• 🌍 The EU aims to create a digital society based on European values and norms, but this may not resonate globally, especially considering historical colonial contexts.
• 📚 Julia's work invites a reevaluation of the motivations behind digital sovereignty and the need for a compelling narrative that can shape a new global digital order.

Q & A

What is the primary focus of Julia P's research?

Julia P's research primarily focuses on discourses and narratives in international and national digital policy debates, and the shifting role of national states in shaping global communication governance.

What is Julia P's current position in the academic field?

Julia P is a senior researcher in the research group Politics of Digitalization at the V Bay in Berlin, and a senior associate researcher at the Center for Digitalization, Democracy and Innovation at the Brussels School of Governance.

What is the significance of the term 'digital sovereignty' in the context of the European Union?

The term 'digital sovereignty' signifies the EU's aspiration for autonomy and control over its digital infrastructures, economy, and policies, aiming to protect European values and norms in the digital space.

How has the concept of 'digital sovereignty' evolved over time?

The concept of 'digital sovereignty' has evolved from an initial idea of the internet as a placeless, borderless space to a current notion where states and governments are seen as having authority and control over cyberspace and digital networks.

What are the key moments or events that have shaped the discourse on digital sovereignty in Europe?

Key moments include the Snowden revelations in 2013, which highlighted dependencies on external digital infrastructures, and the German presidency of the EU Council in 2019, which declared digital sovereignty as the ultimate goal of the EU's digital governance program.

What is the current state of the definition of 'digital sovereignty' within the EU?

There is no shared definition of 'digital sovereignty' within the EU. It is a term with broad interpretation and is used across the political spectrum, by state and non-state actors, each with their own understanding and interpretation.

How does Julia P view the relationship between digital sovereignty and European democratic norms?

Julia P sees the connection between digital sovereignty and European democratic norms as a distortion, arguing that sovereignty is more about autonomy, power, and control rather than rights and freedoms.

What are the three dependencies that Julia P identifies as motivating the EU's discourse on digital sovereignty?

The three dependencies are the EU's dependence on external digital infrastructures, its reliance on non-European tech companies for digital technologies and services, and its realization of structural inequalities reinforced by digital transformation.

What does Julia P suggest as a potential issue with the EU's approach to digital sovereignty?

Julia P suggests that the EU's approach to digital sovereignty might be too focused on control and may not resonate well with democratic values. She also points out the risk of European values being perceived as colonial in nature when promoted globally.

What is Julia P's view on the future of digital sovereignty in shaping a new global digital order?

Julia P believes that while digital sovereignty is an important discourse, it may not be strong enough to define a new global digital order on its own. She suggests that the EU needs to find a more compelling narrative that can attract countries worldwide.

How does the EU's approach to digital sovereignty reflect its broader geopolitical and geoeconomic ambitions?

The EU's approach to digital sovereignty reflects its broader ambitions by attempting to create a digital society based on European values and norms, which is seen as a way to assert influence and control in the global digital economy and to counterbalance the dominance of other major players like the US and China.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to Julia P. and Digital Governance

The script begins with a warm welcome to Julia P., a senior researcher in digitalization politics, who discusses her work at various institutions in Berlin and Brussels. Julia's research interests include narratives in digital policy and the evolving role of states in global communication governance. She also holds positions in media and communication research and edits the 'Internet Policy Review' journal. The speaker highlights a recent meeting between Estonian and German presidents on digitalization and its impact on democracy, setting the stage for Julia's timely discussion on digital sovereignty in Europe.

05:01

🌐 The Shifting Concept of Digital Sovereignty

This paragraph delves into the historical context of digital sovereignty, tracing its evolution from an early notion of a placeless internet to a current understanding that includes state sovereignty over digital spaces. Julia discusses the discursive shift in how sovereignty is conceptualized in relation to digital networks and the implications for nation-states. She also touches on the interdisciplinary nature of her research, combining cultural studies, philosophy, computer science, and communication studies to explore these complex issues.

10:02

🇪🇺 Emergence of Digital Sovereignty in Europe

Julia explains the origins of the term 'digital sovereignty' in Europe, primarily from France and Germany since 2013, and its increasing usage in various forms across the political spectrum. Despite its popularity, there is no unified definition of digital sovereignty within the EU, leading to broad interpretations and applications. The concept has been embraced by non-state actors as well, including the private sector and civil society, reflecting its multifaceted appeal and the lack of a shared understanding.

15:03

📉 The Ambiguities of Digital Sovereignty Discourse

The discourse around digital sovereignty in Europe is characterized by its prescriptive nature, with the term used to express aspirations for the digital future rather than describing current realities. Julia notes the translation of these aspirations into policy initiatives like platform and data protection regulations, which, while having clear objectives, are justified by the broader goal of enhancing digital sovereignty. This leads to a complex mix of motivations behind such policies, which Julia aims to explore further in her research.

20:03

🔍 Unpacking the Motivations Behind Digital Sovereignty

Julia's research seeks to understand the hybrid mix of motivations behind the digital sovereignty discourse, questioning whether it is driven solely by geoeconomic and geopolitical ambitions or if there are deeper normative aspects at play. She challenges the EU's normative claims and suggests that the discourse may be more about control and power than about protecting European values and citizen rights, hinting at a need for a critical reevaluation of the concept.

25:04

🌟 The Future of Digital Sovereignty and Europe's Role

In conclusion, Julia posits that for Europe to truly establish a new global digital order, it must move beyond the concept of digital sovereignty, which may be too closely tied to control and authoritarianism. She suggests that Europe needs a stronger narrative that can attract global interest and redefine the digital global order based on European values and norms. Julia also cautions that Europe's colonial past and current geopolitical dynamics may affect how its digital sovereignty ambitions are perceived and received by other countries.

Keywords

💡Digital Sovereignty

Digital sovereignty refers to the concept of a state's authority and control over its digital infrastructure and data. In the context of the video, it is a central theme, reflecting the EU's ambition to maintain autonomy and control in the digital realm. The speaker discusses how the term has evolved from an initial notion of the internet as a placeless space to a current understanding where states and governments assert sovereignty over cyberspace.

💡Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is a research method that examines the way language is used in social and political contexts. In the video, the speaker uses discourse analysis to explore the narratives and shifts in the conceptualization of digital sovereignty over the last 30 years, particularly focusing on how the EU frames its digital policy debates.

💡Geopolitics

Geopolitics involves the study of how political dynamics are influenced by geographic factors. The video discusses the geopolitical motivations behind the EU's push for digital sovereignty, such as the desire to balance power with other global digital superpowers like the US and China, and to assert a European agenda in the global digital landscape.

💡Digital Infrastructure

Digital infrastructure encompasses the physical and organizational components that support digital services and technologies. The script highlights the EU's dependency on digital infrastructures not under its control, which has led to a loss of faith in the open and free nature of the internet, as revealed by events like the Snowden revelations.

💡Platform Regulation

Platform regulation refers to the rules and policies governing online platforms, particularly regarding content and data. The video mentions platform regulation as a practice that translates the EU's aspirations for digital sovereignty into enforceable policies, aiming to create a fair and open digital market.

💡Data Protection

Data protection involves safeguarding personal information from unauthorized access and misuse. The script discusses data protection as a key aspect of digital sovereignty, with regulations like the GDPR being a response to the EU's concerns about data privacy and control.

💡Digital Markets Act

The Digital Markets Act is a proposed EU regulation aimed at regulating large online platforms. In the video, it is mentioned as an example of how the EU is translating its digital sovereignty discourse into specific policy initiatives, with the goal of ensuring fair competition and open digital markets.

💡Data Colonialism

Data colonialism is a term used to describe the exploitation of data from developing countries by wealthier nations or corporations. The video script touches on this concept as part of the broader discussion on how digital transformation has reinforced structural inequalities rather than leveling them, leading to a loss of belief in the egalitarian potential of the internet.

💡Digital Transformation

Digital transformation refers to the process of adapting to or influencing technological changes in society. The video discusses how the EU's push for digital sovereignty is part of its broader digital transformation strategy, which includes addressing dependencies on tech companies, infrastructure, and the need to redefine its position in the global digital economy.

💡European Values

European values encompass a set of principles and norms that guide the EU's policies and actions. The video emphasizes the EU's desire to base its digital society on these values, which include democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. The speaker critiques the conflation of digital sovereignty with these values, suggesting that it may not be the most effective strategy for creating a global digital order.

Highlights

Julia P. discusses the concept of digital sovereignty and its evolution in the context of digital governance.

The term 'digital sovereignty' originated primarily from France and Germany, gaining prominence since 2013.

Digital sovereignty has no shared definition within the EU, leading to broad interpretations and applications.

The discourse on digital sovereignty is increasingly connected to European democratic norms and values.

Julia identifies three dependencies that the EU's digital sovereignty discourse aims to overcome: dependency on digital infrastructures, tech companies, and structural inequalities.

The Snowden revelations in 2013 highlighted the EU's dependency on uncontrollable data infrastructures, challenging the belief in an open and free internet.

The platform economy and events like Brexit and the US elections have led to unease with tech companies' control over data and traffic.

Digital transformation has reinforced rather than leveled structural inequalities, contradicting early beliefs about the internet's egalitarian potential.

Julia suggests that the EU needs a stronger narrative than digital sovereignty to redefine the global digital order.

Digital sovereignty may not be the most effective concept to attract global participation due to its association with control and authoritarianism.

The EU's challenge is to create a narrative that can compete with offers from major players like China and the US, which have different visions for the digital economy.

Julia emphasizes the importance of understanding the motivations behind the digital sovereignty discourse, including economic, social, and geopolitical concerns.

The EU's regulatory efforts, such as the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act, are attempts to address dependencies and establish a more level digital playing field.

Julia's research combines interdisciplinary approaches from cultural studies, philosophy, computer science, and communication studies to explore digital sovereignty.

The talk emphasizes the performative function of the digital sovereignty discourse, shaping policy measures and regulatory initiatives in the EU.

Julia calls for a critical examination of the EU's digital sovereignty aspirations, considering the potential conflicts between its normative ambitions and geopolitical interests.

Transcripts

so we're very happy to have uh Julia P

or pully how do you pronounce your name

I'm sorry Pula Pula Pula uh join us uh

from all the way across town or actually

across MAA well maybe not very far away

at all the v b uh um so welcome uh very

much uh to the center of digital

governance here at the her school um so

ulia uh is a senior researcher in the

research group politics of

digitalization uh at the V Bay in Berlin

at social science and at the social

science center and a senior associate

researcher at the center for

digitalization democracy and Innovation

at the Brussels School of governance so

are you in Berlin or are you presently

in Brussels no I'm in Berlin okay right

okay good it's good to be close uh so um

but anyway uh her research focuses on

discourses and narratives in

international and National digital

policy debates and the shifting role of

national States in shaping Global

Communication governance she currently

serves as chair for the communication

policy and Technology at the

International Association for media and

communication research and is an

academic editor for the journal internet

policy review so um in the last couple

of days we just had our own the

rebooting of our digital digitalization

statish and we just had a meeting

between uh the presidents of Estonia and

Germany on what Germany could be

learning about digitalization and we had

a big conversation about what that means

for democracy too so I think this is an

incredibly timely talk and I'm really

glad that she could join us and so we're

looking forward to it uh the floor is

yours thank you very much can everybody

hear me yes I guess so right oh I'm

sorry I should mention this is being

recorded but don't worry if you don't

like having your questions recorded

because uh we will turn the recording

off before Q&A so only the talk is

recorded okay thanks um so let me start

by sharing my screen um

um which we just tried and it should

work now there we

go um no it doesn't sorry for me it

doesn't because I don't get to see what

I should ah yeah here now I don't see

you anymore I'm so sorry you just tested

it and now yes now it works okay well

thank you a lot for having me in this um

series of talks I saw the program I'm

sorry I missed um most of the others

before me I hope to be able to Jo a few

um which are still coming and I will be

talking today about um Europe and about

digital sovereignty which are kind the

two topics um which I'm currently

working on uh I myself uh a kind of

interdisciplinary scholar I have a

background in cultural studies

philosophy and computer science and I

did my PhD in communication studies and

I kind of combine all these different um

disciplines um and the concepts and

theories coming out of these disciplines

in my research although most of the

research I'll be presenting here today

uh uh is really inspired by

communication um studies and especially

by discourse um studies but also as the

title says we'll be touching up in kind

of questions of geopolitics um and

geoeconomics um so what I have been

doing over the last couple of years um

really primarily was looking at

discourses of digital sovereignty um and

I think most of us have heard this term

uh many many times um but what I think

most people who do not deal or like

really look into digital sovereignty

questions a lot often forget is that

digital sovereignty or the concept of

sovereignty has a long history in

digital governance um I can't move my

slides so there we are and so the

discussions around like um the idea of

State sovereignty they really have been

there from the very early moments of

when the digital networks kind of

started to spread around the globe um

and what we can see over the last 30

years is that um there has been some

kind of discursive shift in the way we

conceptualize sovereignty um like with

regards to digital um networks so while

there has been talk at the very

beginning had really has to do with the

fact that digital networks in particular

the internet uh we really imag imagined

as something placeless as something like

a space Without Borders and territories

and so it has been Meed as something

that is completely opposed to the

concept of the nation state um and it

has been also IM something that is

opposed to the concept of State

sovereignty uh State sovereignty which

is like traditionally understood as the

ability to act as a state both

internally and externally kind of

independently quasy independently from

other states and

powers and the change um of the Shi like

the the change of the conceptualization

this discursive shift I'm referring to

kind of has occurred because what we see

now is that the idea of sovereignty has

changed while we saw for that the

network has to be something which is

independent of State sovereignty so has

its own sovereignty cyers space was

imagined as a space which had its own

sovereignty um which was inhabited by

the early internet community in some way

and which governments um and sovereign

states had no Authority and now we have

the idea that states and governments

should actually have sovereignty over

cyberspace and that they should have

ways in kind of enforcing their

authorities also in the internet and

with regarding to digital networks and

Digital Services though though there has

been a conceptual shift and the term

sovereignty when it's today used with

relation to cyberspace or to the

internet has really a very different

meaning um to how it has been used at

the very beginning and this has a lot to

do with shifting imaginaries and

shifting ideas about what the internet

is and what the internet should be and

this is something I will be coming back

um in a minute so since I thought I I

said I will be speak speaking about

digital sovereignty in Europe um I think

it's also uh good to have some idea of

when we started to speak about

sovereignty digital sovereignty in the

European space it's a concept which was

really coming out mainly out of France

and Germany uh but you can say that more

or less from 2013 onwards um there are

kind of regular calls U for more

self-determination um with regards to

the digital in Europe and they have been

framed in different terms so what I like

a lot of speaking about tech sovereignty

um there is still a lot of talk about

digital strategic autonomy there are

differences between these different

concepts data Serenity is also one but

in in the in the heart it's it's they

all kind of are related to this large

term of digital sovereignty uh and in

2019 this was really kind of a key

moment it was the German presidency of

the EU Council um in its program which

uh declared that digital sovereignty

should be the ultimate goal of uh the EU

digital governance program and this has

been kind of reiterated uh and

reinforced so many times ever since it

always feels like almost feels that

there are no European digital policy

document it doesn't make any kind of

like some kind of reference to digital

sovereignty and also the policy

initiatives um that we have been seeing

over the last couple of years they also

were like were always justified in some

way this reference to digital

sovereignty and despite this kind of

popularity of the term if you want to um

it's interesting that there is no shared

definition in the EU not even like on

the European level on the Brussels level

what digital sovereignty really means H

it's really a term which is has a very

very broad interpretation um and no

clear definition I mean of course did

that even the European Union kind of

brings some definition in different

documents but it's not always the same

and if you speak about to different

actors they would have different

understanding and different um

interpretations of of what digital um

sovereignty really means and many

academic um experts who have been

dealing with these discourse on digital

sovereignty also so this is not a buck

in the but it's a feature of the term so

the digital sovereignty term is so

attractive because everybody can attach

different meanings and different

definitions and ideas to it and the

interesting thing is also that in Europe

digital sovereignty is really used

across actors like used by actors across

the entire political field so from all

the different kind of parties but it's

also really embraced by um by non-state

actors so the private sector also uses

the term um the open source Community

which was even actually one of the first

ones to really use it h but also Civil

Society is using the term so it's a

really kind of uh broadly used term with

no shared definition uh behind it and

what comes when we say there's no shared

definition it really means that there is

a large range of ideas of what digital

sovereignty can mean and they range from

Collective self-determination meaning

like the autonomy of the state the

security of its it infrastructures the

competitiveness and the in Independence

of um of the digital economy um to kind

of more individual ideas of

self-determination that could be kind of

um the self-determination the

sovereignty of the users of digital

products it can be the digital

competences and the literacy of of users

um digital users but also it could be

kind of uh the the digital

kind of the the digital rights of

European citizens this is also linked um

to the idea of digital sovereignty and

and particular this kind of idea of um

digital sovereignty

being in an individual capacity is very

strong in Germany and this has created

also on the European level some

confusion especially among the French

and the German while the French would

never understand why sovereignty can be

linked to individuals it's there is

always kind of a collective um thing so

this is kind of all in this term and

makes this term very fussy in some way

and a second characteristic of the

digital sovereignty and debate in in

Europe is that

um currently or still this term is used

in a very kind of prescriptive way it's

really used to express aspirations like

of a digital future that where we want

to get to it's not really used as a

description of a situation that we have

today and it's not really used as a

situation that can ever happen so it's

really used to to make claims um to

sovereignty uh and to kind of uh project

ideas into the future if it just

strengthen our digital sovereignty then

we will reach um something and of course

despite this prescriptive usage it's

also kind of translated uh into

practices um so especially in the

European level we can see all this

platform regulation uh and data

protection um regulation that is in some

way a translation of these ideas behind

digital sovereignty but all these um

kind of measures have very clear

objective so the for example the digital

markets Act is about a fair and open

market the gdpr is about data protection

so they're not really about digital

sovereignty they're just legitimized and

Justified with this aspiration to

digital sovereignty and many of these

clear objectives Behind these um Behind

these measures are also in some way of

conflict to each other so this also

creates kind of adds to the fussiness of

the term of digital

sovereignty and the third characteristic

which I see in the discourse on digital

sovereignty on the European level is and

I'm sorry I'm so having trouble with my

slides not advancing yes there we are is

that it is um the digital sovereignty

discourse is increasingly normatively

loaded so that means that we uh in

Europe we can see the digital

sovereignty becomes increasingly

connected to European and Democratic

norms and values it's almost you see

kind of in in the language it's almost

Cal sovereignty is almost set equal with

the protection of um European values

and the protection of of of Citizen

rights uh which in my opinion is a

complete Distortion of the concept of

sovereignty which is not about rights

and freedoms but it's really about

autonomy power control um so you can see

that say also that many of these claims

and these references to normative values

in the discourse of digital sovereignty

are really used as a normative

justification for other purposes and so

they used to justify me meths that might

actually be motivated by other interest

for example economic interest or our

security

interests and all of this kind of

cumulates in a in a in a digital policy

agenda on the European level which I

think and this is a quote um says what

Europe tries to achieve with a me is to

create a digital Society based on

European values and European rules so

what this means is that digital

sovereignty is a discourse it's an

imaginary right and digital sovereignty

Digital Society based on European values

and European rules is really an

imaginary so it's an idea we aspired to

but it's not something that just already

realized and that is Al um already

existing um but of course Europe has

been adopting um measures uh policies

and regulations that kind of tried to

bring us to this imaginary so you can

say that this discourse on digital

sovereignty really has a performative

function um so they kind of they the the

the Logics behind all these different um

directives and regulations that we have

been seeing over the last um 10 years uh

and these um since this digal

sovereignty discourse is is so broad you

can say that all these different policy

measures we are seeing are really

motivated by a very complex set of

economic social and geopolitical

concerns there which are somehow related

to the strive of digital sovereignty and

uh one of my colleagues or several of my

colleagues um in a paper called them um

these measures they called them a

creation of of hybrid policies combining

internal Market fundamental rights and

geopolitical motivations and this is

really something that cly also applies

to digital sovereignty um discourse it's

this mix of different motivations uh

which are behind this discourse and

which are behind these measures which

really make them also extremely

interesting um so what I was trying to

do in my recent research is really to

look to understand where this hybrid mix

of motivations um comes from so I really

wanted to understand what is this

discourse of digital sovereignty like

where does it come from is it just a

discourse um which is actually motivated

by what many people argue by geoeconomic

and geopolitical Ambitions or is it just

a normative discourse as the EU often

put it itself like we want to kind of

achieve um a situation where we can

protect European uh values and Norms um

so I I I usually kind of try to

criticize this very normative ambition

behind the digital sovereignty um um

discourse and also say that this this is

actually I rather see that most of the

things in this discourse are really

motivated by geoeconomic and

geopolitical um interests um but then I

started to wonder in my in my last paper

is that um are we maybe when we think

about this kind of digital sovereignty

being a geoeconomic and geopolitical

ambition are we

underestimating the motivations behind

it um am I maybe reducing them to kind

of real real political interests is

there not more behind this um than just

geoeconomics and geopolitical um

Ambitions and I also started to look at

the the research that has been done on

digital sovereignty and was wondering if

we all get to kind of focused on the

concept of sovereignty in digital

sovereignty and what sovereignty means

in relation um to this digital and how

this kind of idea of sovereignty is kind

of also contributing to the larger EU

geopolitical and geoeconomic um ambition

and I start think that actually maybe

what we should really look at to

understand where this coming from we

should look at the digital in digital

sovereignty and really understand what

is happening in the digital what has

been happening in the last decade in the

digital sphere to understand actually

where we are coming from and where we

want to get with digital sovereignty and

what are the real motivations and what

do we want to overcome um what kind of

challenges do we want to overcome with

our strive for digital sovereignty and

this is what I um tried to do in a

recent paper and this is what I'm also

trying to present very quickly here um

so the the I I tried to kind of

understand sorry there's some strange

text on that slide there is um the the

the black text you can ignore it um

there's I tried to kind of regroup all

the motivations I find I found into a

category like into three different

categories which I link to three kind of

dependencies that came apparent over the

last decade uh which the EU with it

strive for digal sovereignty tries to

overcome and all of these dependencies

are somehow also linked to um a shift in

the belief system um behind our digital

policies so the very first one um that I

identified is the um sorry C there we go

is the dependency um on digital

infrastructures so what uh you can see

is that with the Snowden revelations in

2013 it came off kind of suddenly um um

there came this sudden realization that

the open and free internet that we saw

we had and that the U us until today is

still pretending that tries to protect

does not exist and maybe has never

existed so there is this idea of a free

and open internet in which every

everyone can kind openly and anonymously

um and freely share information on an

equal level it never existed Maybe only

in the very early days when there was a

very small community of Internet users

very homogeneous and now today it still

clearly doesn't exist and this really

come came apparent with the Snowden

revelations in 2013 and it has been kind

of reconfirmed over the time of course

with all the other events that has have

happened um ever since so there was kind

of this realization that we are really

dependent on data infrastructures that

are not in our control and this kind of

led to a loss in the believe in the

internet um openness and the anonymity

of the internet and that the internet is

a decentralized network um that does not

favor certain actors over others and

that does not allow for central control

points they actually realize that there

are central control points and that

there are some favored over others so

this is kind of the first kind of

dependency that is behind the

motivations of the European Union for

its digal sovereignty discourse the

second one I found um in the discourse

analysis I did is of of course um that

the realization that we are very

dependent on tech companies and private

actors that provide us with our digital

Technologies and our infrastructures and

the services we use and they are all

primarily based outside of Europe and so

there is this over the last decade I

mean this is obvious to all of us is

there is this kind of growing unease

with the platform economy um and it has

been kind of triggered by disinformation

campaigns um by the events happening

during the elections in the US and

Brazil and many other countries is the

brexit um referendum and so on and so

this realization this dependency on on

tech companies and the way they handle

our our data traffic has lost kind of

led to a loss in the belief in the

internet as a global comment so the idea

that the internet is actually a glob in

common it can be freely used by everyone

without that some benefit more than

others this was kind of the idea that

was kind of how the internet was sold to

us in the 1990s and that what we see

today is kind of W Gardens lock systems

we see a data economy that is profoundly

unequal and so we kind of lost also the

belief in the the liberal or the

neoliberal governance system behind the

internet which actually allowed this

world garden and lock system um to grow

and I think in Europe in particular

Europe realized that it has absolutely

nothing to counter this problem um and

this is what we can see now in these

ongoing regulatory efforts like the DSA

the dma they were trying now to get kind

of get a hand on this um and see that we

find some way to counter this and the

third dependency that I identified um is

um the realization that we are dependent

on structural um

inequalities uh and these have kind of

the idea that these structural

inequalities have absolutely not been

leveled by the digital transformation

but really have been reinforced um

through data extractivism through the

creation of relationships we called

nowadays often called digital

colonialism um so the idea at the very

beginning was that the internet would

kind of create a a global um village it

would kind of really help to overcome um

structural inequalities that have been

there for centuries um and that I mean

that's the discourse of the Information

Society in the 1990s and the early 2000s

if we just kind of would be able to

close the digital divide and would allow

kind of the developing worlds to LEAP

frck into this kind of new way society

called The Information Society thanks to

the internet then we would be all

becoming kind of a global and equal

Society so we lost the belief in in this

kind of um of idea and we lost the

belief in the egalitarian idea of the

internet community so that the internet

Community is egalitarian in some way and

I think what for the EU was the hardest

that it realized um what it didn't

expect at the time like of the Discord

of the Information Society that it would

also be on the losing side of this um I

think the EU always believed that it it

had already

kind of yeah as always been one of the

the major forces and would be kind of um

in in this in the first positions and in

these um structural inequalities um and

it had to realize that actually um all

countries um are trying to extend some

way the influence um through the digital

economies through infrastructure

projects uh through the dominance in

data flows through data agreements and

so on and there has simply been two

countries which are really strong which

is the US um of course on one side but

also over the last decade we have seen

China um and Europe simply doesn't have

a seat on that table um maybe it's only

has a seat on the small children tables

with some of the other countries like

India and Brazil but it clearly is not

among the major players in how the

internet is shaped um and who's like

winning the race for the digital economy

um competition so these were like kind

of the the three um dependencies and the

kind of three loss of belief Bel that I

identified um which motivated digal

sovereignty discourse in Europe um and

that brings me already to my kind of

concluding slide is that um if the EU

really wants to have a seat on this

table and it wants to play kind of on

equal level with with countries like

China and the US um and that's a stated

kind of really objective of the European

Union right the the EU always says it

wants to Define um a European Third Way

of the digital transformation it it want

it wants to create a a digital society

that is based I had this slide before on

European values and European um Norms um

it it really needs to think about how to

do this um digital sovereignty is

clearly not only a GE economic and GE um

political strategy um it is also really

a normative strategy but it has to be

more than this because if it's the EU is

searching for some kind of new major

narrative that would replace all all our

beliefs we have in the internet with new

beliefs so if we want to kind of replace

this Narrative of the open free internet

the equalitarian internet Community the

idea that the internet is a global

common if you want to replace this with

new ideas it has to come up with a very

strong um concept and a very strong idea

how this new kind of digital Global

order should look like and it really has

to to to create a narrative um that can

attract all countries um around the

world and I personally don't believe

that digital sovereignty has the

potential to do this first of course

because I think the concept of

sovereignty is so much linked to control

um and it's also so much linked to the

authoritarian countries that it has

difficulties kind of to to to sell the

link between European and democratic

values and and sovereignty but also I

think um Europe also needs to be careful

in what how it is communicating its

ambition to become kind of or to kind of

create this new Global digital order

because if it around the world saying we

want to bring European uh values and

Norms through our regulations uh and

through our infrastructure projects and

there are some Al they're very small uh

if they want to bring this to the global

sou I think in particular in African

countries there is this difficulties

that there is a colonial past um and a

history and they might not be very

welcoming to the idea of of bringing

Democratic European values um into um

their systems again so they might be

much more attracted by the Chinese offer

which is coming with huge infra

structure projects and a very different

Vision uh of a digital Global Order so

this is kind of what I think about

digital sovereignty it needs the EU

needs to find an imaginary that is

stronger than digital sovereignty if it

really has this ambition to define a new

Global digital

order and if you want to to read this

was very short um if you want to read a

bit more about how I thought about this

and what I said about the EU digital

sovereignty um discourse

I I wrote quite of a few articles on

this over the last couple of years um

and of course now I have time for

question and answers thank you very much