Europe’s security does not depend solely on our physical borders and their defense. It rests on something far less visible, and far more sensitive: the digital networks that keep our societies, economies and democracies functioning every second of the day. > Without resilient networks, the daily workings of Europe would grind to a > halt, and so too would any attempt to build meaningful defense readiness. A recent study by Copenhagen Economics confirms that telecom operators have become the first line of defense in Europe’s security architecture. Their networks power essential services ranging from emergency communications and cross-border healthcare to energy systems, financial markets, transport and, increasingly, Europe’s defense capabilities. Without resilient networks, the daily workings of Europe would grind to a halt, and so too would any attempt to build meaningful defense readiness. This reality forces us to confront an uncomfortable truth: Europe cannot build credible defense capabilities on top of an economically strained, structurally fragmented telecom sector. Yet this is precisely the risk today. A threat landscape outpacing Europe’s defenses The challenges facing Europe are evolving faster than our political and regulatory systems can respond. In 2023 alone, ENISA recorded 188 major incidents, causing 1.7 billion lost user-hours, the equivalent of taking entire cities offline. While operators have strengthened their systems and outage times fell by more than half in 2024 compared with the previous year, despite a growing number of incidents, the direction of travel remains clear: cyberattacks are more sophisticated, supply chains more vulnerable and climate-related physical disruptions more frequent. Hybrid threats increasingly target civilian digital infrastructure as a way to weaken states. Telecom networks, once considered as technical utilities, have become a strategic asset essential to Europe’s stability. > Europe cannot deploy cross-border defense capabilities without resilient, > pan-European digital infrastructure. Nor can it guarantee NATO > interoperability with 27 national markets, divergent rules and dozens of > sub-scale operators unable to invest at continental scale. Our allies recognize this. NATO recently encouraged members to spend up to 1.5 percent of their GDP on protecting critical infrastructure. Secretary General Mark Rutte also urged investment in cyber defense, AI, and cloud technologies, highlighting the military benefits of cloud scalability and edge computing – all of which rely on high-quality, resilient networks. This is a clear political signal that telecom security is not merely an operational matter but a geopolitical priority. The link between telecoms and defense is deeper than many realize. As also explained in the recent Arel report, Much More than a Network, modern defense capabilities rely largely on civilian telecom networks. Strong fiber backbones, advanced 5G and future 6G systems, resilient cloud and edge computing, satellite connectivity, and data centers form the nervous system of military logistics, intelligence and surveillance. Europe cannot deploy cross-border defense capabilities without resilient, pan-European digital infrastructure. Nor can it guarantee NATO interoperability with 27 national markets, divergent rules and dozens of sub-scale operators unable to invest at continental scale. Fragmentation has become one of Europe’s greatest strategic vulnerabilities. The reform Europe needs: An investment boost for digital networks At the same time, Europe expects networks to become more resilient, more redundant, less dependent on foreign technology and more capable of supporting defense-grade applications. Security and resilience are not side tasks for telecom operators, they are baked into everything they do. From procurement and infrastructure design to daily operations, operators treat these efforts as core principles shaping how networks are built, run and protected. Therefore, as the Copenhagen Economics study shows, the level of protection Europe now requires will demand substantial additional capital. > It is unrealistic to expect world-class, defense-ready infrastructure to > emerge from a model that has become structurally unsustainable. This is the right ambition, but the economic model underpinning the sector does not match these expectations. Due to fragmentation and over-regulation, Europe’s telecom market invests less per capita than global peers, generates roughly half the return on capital of operators in the United States and faces rising costs linked to expanding security obligations. It is unrealistic to expect world-class, defense-ready infrastructure to emerge from a model that has become structurally unsustainable. A shift in policy priorities is therefore essential. Europe must place investment in security and resilience at the center of its political agenda. Policy must allow this reality to be reflected in merger assessments, reduce overlapping security rules and provide public support where the public interest exceeds commercial considerations. This is not state aid; it is strategic social responsibility. Completing the single market for telecommunications is central to this agenda. A fragmented market cannot produce the secure, interoperable, large-scale solutions required for modern defense. The Digital Networks Act must simplify and harmonize rules across the EU, supported by a streamlined governance that distinguishes between domestic matters and cross-border strategic issues. Spectrum policy must also move beyond national silos, allowing Europe to avoid conflicts with NATO over key bands and enabling coherent next-generation deployments. Telecom policy nowadays is also defense policy. When we measure investment gaps in digital network deployment, we still tend to measure simple access to 5G and fiber. However, we should start considering that — if security, resilience and defense-readiness are to be taken into account — the investment gap is much higher that the €200 billion already estimated by the European Commission. Europe’s strategic choice The momentum for stronger European defense is real — but momentum fades if it is not seized. If Europe fails to modernize and secure its telecom infrastructure now, it risks entering the next decade with a weakened industrial base, chronic underinvestment, dependence on non-EU technologies and networks unable to support advanced defense applications. In that scenario, Europe’s democratic resilience would erode in parallel with its economic competitiveness, leaving the continent more exposed to geopolitical pressure and technological dependency. > If Europe fails to modernize and secure its telecom infrastructure now, it > risks entering the next decade with a weakened industrial base, chronic > underinvestment, dependence on non-EU technologies and networks unable to > support advanced defense applications. Europe still has time to change course and put telecoms at the center of its agenda — not as a technical afterthought, but as a core pillar of its defense strategy. The time for incremental steps has passed. Europe must choose to build the network foundations of its security now or accept that its strategic ambitions will remain permanently out of reach. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Connect Europe AISBL * The ultimate controlling entity is Connect Europe AISBL * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on EU digital, telecom and industrial policy, including initiatives such as the Digital Networks Act, Digital Omnibus, and connectivity, cybersecurity, and defence frameworks aimed at strengthening Europe’s digital competitiveness. More information here.

BRUSSELS — Lawmakers in the European Parliament’s legal affairs committee have voted to go ahead and sue the European Commission for axing a proposal to regulate patent licensing. The JURI committee on Tuesday voted in favor of referring the Commission to the Court of Justice of the European Union for breaching EU law by withdrawing a proposal to regulate standard essential patents. The patents, for 4G and 5G networks used in mobile phones and connected cars, have been at the center of a long-running battle between the companies that own them and those that use them. European lawmakers have supported efforts to resolve the fight — and some accuse the EU executive of attacking democracy by killing off the initiative. President Roberta Metsola now needs to mandate the Parliament’s legal service to draft and file a case by Nov. 14, a Parliament official said, citing rules of procedure. If she intends to depart from JURI’s conclusions, she could also bring it to the Conference of Presidents or, in an unlikely scenario, submit it to a plenary vote, they added. Fourteen MEPs voted in favor of the action, against eight who opposed it, the official said. The vote was held behind closed doors.  The motion was spearheaded by German Social Democrat René Repasi, coordinator for the Committee on Legal Affairs and standing rapporteur for disputes involving the Parliament. “With today’s vote, we send a clear message: we will not stand by when the Commission oversteps its mandate,” Repasi said in an emailed statement following the vote. “The Commission’s right to withdraw a proposal, as was conducted with the Standard-Essential Patents (SEP) proposal, cannot be used as a political instrument to short-circuit Parliament’s work or to enforce a deregulation agenda from above. This is not in line with how the democratic processes in the European Union are meant to function.” Members of the European People’s Party, the center-right party allied to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, were instructed to vote against taking legal action. “Today’s vote reflects Parliament’s concern about the balance of powers between EU institutions, but we must be clear: This legal action will not bring back the withdrawn legislative proposal,” Adrián Vázquez Lázara, the EPP’s lead on the issue, told POLITICO.  While he acknowledged that the withdrawal of the SEP bill raised some question marks, Vázquez Lázara said that legal action was not the right solution. “What can be questioned, however, is the wording and justification used in this specific withdrawal, which raises legitimate concerns about institutional transparency and communication,” Vázquez Lázara said. “Those Members who wish to see the proposal revived should seek political and legislative avenues to achieve that goal, rather than resorting to institutional confrontation.” Patent implementers, which historically supported the regulation and range from carmakers to Big Tech companies and SMEs, cheered the move. “There is still hope for democracy and fairness in the EU legislature,” said Evelina Kurgonaite of the Fair Standards Alliance, which represents the patent users. “We thank MEP [Marion] Walsmann and other JURI members for their leadership in fighting for a fair chance at innovation for  businesses in Europe, especially SMEs.” The Commission declined to comment.

BRUSSELS — First it was telecom snooping. Now Europe is growing worried that Huawei could turn the lights off. The Chinese tech giant is at the heart of a brewing storm over the security of Europe’s energy grids. Lawmakers are writing to the European Commission to urge it to “restrict high-risk vendors” from solar energy systems, in a letter seen by POLITICO. Such restrictions would target Huawei first and foremost, as the dominant Chinese supplier of critical parts of these systems. The fears center around solar panel inverters, a piece of technology that turns solar panels’ electricity into current that flows into the grid. China is a dominant supplier of these inverters, and Huawei is its biggest player. Because the inverters are hooked up to the internet, security experts warn the inverters could be tampered with or shut down through remote access, potentially causing dangerous surges or drops in electricity in Europe’s networks. The warnings come as European governments have woken up to the risks of being reliant on other regions for critical services — from Russian gas to Chinese critical raw materials and American digital services. The bloc is in a stand-off with Beijing over trade in raw materials, and has faced months of pressure from Washington on how Brussels regulates U.S. tech giants. Cybersecurity authorities are close to finalizing work on a new “toolbox” to de-risk tech supply chains, with solar panels among its key target sectors, alongside connected cars and smart cameras. Two members of the European Parliament, Dutch liberal Bart Groothuis and Slovak center-right lawmaker Miriam Lexmann, drafted a letter warning the European Commission of the risks. “We urge you to propose immediate and binding measures to restrict high-risk vendors from our critical infrastructure,” the two wrote. The members had gathered the support of a dozen colleagues by Wednesday and are canvassing for more to join the initiative before sending the letter mid next week.   According to research by trade body SolarPower Europe, Chinese firms control approximately 65 percent of the total installed power in the solar sector. The largest company in the European market is Huawei, a tech giant that is considered a high-risk vendor of telecom equipment. The second-largest firm is Sungrow, which is also Chinese, and controls about half the amount of solar power as Huawei. Huawei’s market power recently allowed it to make its way back into SolarPower Europe, the solar sector’s most prominent lobby association in Brussels, despite an ongoing Belgian bribery investigation focused on the firm’s lobbying activities in Brussels that saw it banned from meeting with European Commission and Parliament officials. Security hawks are now upping the ante. Cybersecurity experts and European manufacturers say the Chinese conglomerate and its peers could hack into Europe’s power grid.  “They can disable safety parameters. They can set it on fire,” Erika Langerová, a cybersecurity researcher at the Czech Technical University in Prague, said in a media briefing hosted by the U.S. Mission to the EU in September.  Even switching solar installation off and on again could disrupt energy supply, Langerová said. “When you do it on one installation, it’s not a problem, but then you do it on thousands of installations it becomes a problem because the … compound effect of these sudden changes in the operation of the device can destabilize the power grid.”  Surges in electricity supply can trigger wider blackouts, as seen in Spain and Portugal in April. | Matias Chiofalo/Europa Press via Getty Images Surges in electricity supply can trigger wider blackouts, as seen in Spain and Portugal in April. Some governments have already taken further measures. Last November, Lithuania imposed a ban on remote access by Chinese firms to renewable energy installations above 100 kilowatts, effectively stopping the use of Chinese inverters. In September, the Czech Republic issued a warning on the threat posed by Chinese remote access via components including solar inverters. And in Germany, security officials already in 2023 told lawmakers that an “energy management component” from Huawei had them on alert, leading to a government probe of the firm’s equipment. CHINESE CONTROL, EU RESPONSE  The arguments leveled against Chinese manufacturers of solar inverters echo those heard from security experts in previous years, in debates on whether or not to block companies like video-sharing app TikTok, airport scanner maker Nuctech and — yes — Huawei’s 5G network equipment. Distrust of Chinese technology has skyrocketed. Under President Xi Jinping, the Beijing government has rolled out regulations forcing Chinese companies to cooperate with security services’ requests to share data and flag vulnerabilities in their software. It has led to Western concerns that it opens the door to surveillance and snooping. One of the most direct threats involves remote management from China of products embedded in European critical infrastructure. Manufacturers have remote access to install updates and maintenance. Europe has also grown heavily reliant on Chinese tech suppliers, particularly when it comes to renewable energy, which is powering an increasing proportion of European energy. Domestic manufacturers of solar panels have enough supply to fill the gap that any EU action to restrict Chinese inverters would create, Langerová said. But Europe does not yet have enough battery or wind manufacturers — two clean energy sector China also dominates. China’s dominance also undercuts Europe’s own tech sector and comes with risks of economic coercion. Until only a few years ago, European firms were competitive, before being undercut by heavily subsidized Chinese products, said Tobias Gehrke, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. China on the other hand does not allow foreign firms in its market because of cybersecurity concerns, he said. The European Union previously developed a 5G security toolbox to reduce its dependence on Huawei over these fears. It is also working on a similar initiative, known as the ICT supply chain toolbox, to help national governments scan their wider digital infrastructure for weak points, with a view to blocking or reduce the use of “high-risk suppliers.” According to Groothuis and Lexmann, “binding legislation to restrict risky vendors in our critical infrastructure is urgently required” across the European Union. Until legislation is passed, the EU should put temporary measures in place, they said in their letter.  Huawei did not respond to requests for comment before publication. This article has been updated.

BRUSSELS — Two of Europe’s tech powerhouses tied the knot on Tuesday in a landmark deal that bolsters a push by politicians to reduce reliance on the United States for critical technology. Dutch microchips champion ASML confirmed it was investing €1.3 billion in French AI frontrunner Mistral, one of the few European companies that is able to go head-to-head with U.S. leaders like OpenAI and Anthropic on artificial intelligence technology.  It’s a business deal soaked in politics. Officials from Brussels to Paris, Berlin and beyond have called for Europe to reduce its heavy reliance on U.S. technology — from the cloud to social media and, most recently, artificial intelligence — under the banner of “tech sovereignty.”  “European tech sovereignty is being built thanks to you,” was how France’s Junior Minister for Digital Affairs and AI Clara Chappaz cheered the deal on X. Europe has struggled to stand out in the global race to build generative AI ever since U.S.-based OpenAI burst onto the scene in 2022 with its popular ChatGPT chatbot. Legacy tech giants like Google quickly caught up, while China proved its mettle early this January when DeepSeek burst onto the scene. European politicians can showcase the ASML-Mistral deal as proof that European consumers and companies still can rely on homegrown tools. That need has never been more urgent amid strained EU-U.S. ties under Donald Trump’s repeated attacks against EU tech regulation. But the deal also illustrates that while Europe can excel in niche areas, like industrial AI applications, winning the global consumer AI chatbot race is out of reach. EUROPE KEEPS CONTROL Tuesday’s deal brings together two European companies that are most closely watched by those in power. ASML, a 40-year-old Dutch crown jewel, has grown into one of the bloc’s most politically sensitive assets in recent years. The U.S. government has repeatedly tried to block some of the company’s sales of its advanced microchips printing machines to China in an effort to slow down Chinese firms.  Mistral is only two years old but has been politically plugged in from the start, with former French Digital Minister Cédric O among its co-founders.      When the company faced the need to raise new funding this summer, several non-European players were floated as potential backers, including the Abu Dhabi-based MGX state fund. There were even rumors Mistral could be acquired by Apple. Apple’s acquisition of Mistral would have been “quite negative” for Europe’s tech sovereignty aspirations, said Leevi Saari, EU policy fellow at the U.S.-based AI Now Institute, which studies the social implications of AI. “The French state has no appetite [for] letting this happen,” he added.  Getting financing from an Abu Dhabi-based fund, conversely, would have reinforced the perception that Europe can provide the millions in venture capital funding needed to start a company, but not the billions needed to scale it.  With this week’s €1.7 billion funding round led by ASML, Europe’s tech sovereignty proponents can breath a sigh of relief. “European champions creating more European champions is the way to go forward and it needs further backing from the EU,” said Dutch liberal European Parliament lawmaker Bart Groothuis in a statement. The deal is also what officials, experts and the industry want to see more of: one where startups are backed by an established European corporation rather than a venture capitalist. “A European corporation finally investing massively in a European scale-up from its industry, even [if] it [is] not directly tied to its core business,” said Agata Hidalgo, public affairs lead at French startup group France Digitale, on Linkedin. A French government adviser, granted anonymity to speak freely on private deals, said they felt “hyped” by the news after months of uncertainty due to Mistral’s refusal to publicly deny talks with Apple. The deal is also expected to avoid any close scrutiny from Europe’s powerful antitrust regulators, which in the past have intervened in mergers and deals to keep the market competitive. Tuesday’s deal is not a full takeover and does not need merger clearance. Nicolas Petit, a competition law professor at the European University Institute, said there was “nothing to see here unless the EU wants to shoot itself in the foot with a bazooka.” “It’s a non-controlling investment, and neither ASML [nor] Mistral AI compete in any product or service market,” he added. REALITY CHECK While the incoming Dutch investment goes a long way toward keeping Mistral in European hands, it also determines the path forward for the French artificial intelligence challenger.  Mistral had already been struggling “to keep up with the race for market share” with other large language models, Saari claimed in a blogpost published last week, in which he cited numbers suggesting that Mistral’s market share is “around 2 percent.”  “Mistral was known to face challenges both technically and in finding a business model,” said Italian economist Cristina Caffarra, who has been leading the charge for European tech sovereignty through the Eurostack movement. “It’s great they found a European champion anchor investor” that will, in part, “protect them from the [venture capital] model.” Tuesday’s deal could mean that Mistral will get more support to work on industrial applications instead of a consumer-facing chatbot that venture capitalists like to propagate.  “With Mistral AI we have found a strategic partner who can not only deliver the scientific AI models that will help us develop even better tools and solutions for our customers, but also help us to improve our own operations over time,” ASML CEO Christophe Fouquet wrote in a post on Linkedin.  ASML’s main customers are the world’s biggest microchips manufacturers, including Taiwan’s TSMC and America’s Intel. The company also has a wide network of industrial suppliers, which could be leveraged as well. For Mistral, catering to European industrial applications could strengthen its business. But it could also be seen as a tacit admission that in the global AI race, Europe has to pick its battles.  Francesca Micheletti and Océane Herrerro contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission is dialing reform, but not everyone is picking up. Following years of talks, Brussels is almost ready to drop a long-awaited telecommunication blueprint designed to upgrade networks and support the industry. The Digital Networks Act, expected to land Dec. 16, will overhaul the current rulebook to make it easier for operators to roll out 5G and fiber, and boost investment in Europe’s digital infrastructure. But it’s likely to upset players from national governments to tech firms in the process. The continent’s biggest telecom companies have long argued that stifling rules and a fragmented single market make it hard for them to scale and earn sustainable profits — and take European networks to the next level. “Never has connectivity been so important to the life of people” but “at the same time, our industry has trouble in many regions to achieve a decent return on capital,” said Vivek Badrinath, the boss of global mobile association GSMA. But not everyone is buying the crisis pitch — here are the battle lines ahead of the proposal. BIG TELCOS VS. BIG TECH Years of lobbying by Europe’s top telcos to have data-hungry platforms such as TikTok, Netflix and Google’s YouTube help foot the bill for network expansion seem to have paid off. The Commission is now weighing how to tackle “challenges in the cooperation” between tech and telecom players in its reforms. One of the options on the table is turning into a political minefield: Empowering regulators to settle potential disputes between the two groups over how they handle traffic. Opponents of regulatory intervention fear that it will give operators a way to pressure content providers for payments, akin to the unpopular proposal known as “fair share” that was floated under the last Commission. At worst, they say, it could even upend the internet as we know it by undermining net neutrality — the principle that service providers need to treat all traffic equally, without throttling or censoring. “This would have immediate and far-reaching consequences, harming European consumers, businesses, digital rights and the sustainability of the creative and cultural sectors, ultimately risking a fragmented Internet and single market,” a broad coalition, ranging from civil society and media organizations to audiovisual players, wrote earlier this month. The continent’s biggest telecom companies have long argued that stifling rules and a fragmented single market make it hard for them to scale and earn sustainable profits. | Andy Rain/EPA Regulators themselves say they don’t see any market failure, or need for a legislative fix. “It’s increasingly hard for me to think that the Commission is approaching this in good faith because they cannot ignore the chaotic impact that something like this would have,” said Benoît Felten, an expert at Plum Consulting who authored a study on the topic commissioned by Big Tech lobby CCIA. Tech companies will fight tooth and nail against any move to hold them to the same obligations that telecom operators have to follow. “The same service, same rules principle should be a no-brainer,” said Alessandro Gropelli, the boss of telecom trade association Connect Europe. “You cannot have competitiveness if one party is playing the game with their hand tied behind their back and the other party is playing the same game with both hands.” INCUMBENTS VS. CHALLENGERS Brussels’ deregulatory mood is further deepening rifts between Europe’s top telecom providers and their challengers, who have long praised the existing rulebook that they say enables them to take on legacy players. “The Commission wants to deregulate dogmatically” in order “to boost the largest operators in Europe,” said Luc Hindryckx, the director general of the European Competitive Telecommunications Association, a trade body. “One way to do it is to weaken the competition to allow a few incumbents to make it through and pave the way for consolidation, because if the competitors are on the verge of bankruptcy, they will ask to be merged.” Telecom challengers are up in arms against the direction of travel, which could see the Commission dial down the regulatory pressure on Europe’s legacy telcos to open their ducts and fiber lines to competitors. The EU executive wants to move away from heavy, upfront rules and closer scrutiny of dominant players to prevent abuse, instead relying on standard law enforcement. It argues the current system worked to boost competition but has outlived its purpose. It is “alarming that the European Commission is now proposing to relax regulation on former fixed monopolies,” a coalition of nine network operators wrote in a letter this month. Signatories — including France’s Iliad and the U.K.’s Vodafone — called out the proposed “backwards step” and warned against the risk of “re-monopolisation.” This shift, the opponents say, could unravel years of progress by undermining market predictability, deterring investment and pushing up wholesale prices — costs that would inevitably be passed on to consumers. “5G has been a disaster because the real 5G is hardly here,” the Commission’s top digital civil servant Roberto Viola said. | Robert Ghement/EPA “In Germany, it seems that people never run a red light. One could say that people no longer run red lights and then change the law that says running a red light is a major offense. What do you think is going to happen?” Hindryckx quipped. The legacy players don’t agree. “The current ex-ante system leads to low investments and harms roll-out of innovative networks,” said Gropelli from Connect Europe. “Reform is a must, or we’ll remain global laggards in roll-out of critical networks.” CAPITALS VS. BRUSSELS National governments also aren’t cheering the reforms, with EU capitals bristling at the idea of Brussels muscling in on territory they consider their own. That’s the case for the allocation of spectrum — the finite and very much in-demand resource powering wireless communications, which is auctioned at a national level for billions of euros. “5G has been a disaster because the real 5G is hardly here,” the Commission’s top digital civil servant Roberto Viola said in September. “We have been sleeping and lost fifteen years in discussing … who should assign the frequencies,” he said. Still, the topic is largely off the table for national governments. “Spectrum harmonization is not the favorite topic of member countries,” Katalin Molnár, the ambassador for Hungary, said last year as the country chaired talks among EU governments on the issue. The current cooperation between countries “works well,” the 27 EU nations said in a joint position, emphasizing that spectrum management is a “key public policy tool” that falls under a “sustained significance of member states’ national competencies in that regard.” This will be a major red line for the Council of the EU, where capitals will eventually hammer out their position on the reforms. The industry, however, says reforms are essential for the economic benefits that the EU is craving. “The wind has never been as strong in the sails of the ship that goes towards a more efficient telecom market today,” GSMA’s Badrinath said. “Is that enough to get the right outcome? Well, that’s what we want to believe.”

Iran’s cyber command ordered top officials and their security teams to avoid IT equipment connected to telecom networks in a sign they fear digital disruption from Israel. The news was reported by the Fars news agency on Tuesday, which is affiliated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Israel and Iran have clashed militarily since Israel launched Operation Rising Lion last Friday, targeting Tehran’s nuclear capabilities. Explosions were reported Tuesday in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, as Iranian state media claimed a new wave of missiles had been launched toward Israel. Lukasz Olejnik, a visiting senior research fellow of the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, said the Iranian decision to avoid connected kit signals “deep concern” that ordinary devices can be hacked and tampered with. “It suggests Tehran fears adversaries can use connected devices to track, intercept, or even target key officials,” he said. Israel has used connected devices to kill individuals in the past. Last September, it used explosive pagers to hit Hezbollah targets, injuring nearly 3,000 people — a sophisticated and carefully orchestrated attack in which Israeli security services hit the Lebanon-based terrorist group by simultaneously triggering minute quantities of explosive hidden in thousands of modified hand-held devices distributed among Hezbollah operatives. “Israel is definitely a cyber superpower,” said Matt Pearl, former director for emerging technologies at the National Security Council during the Biden administration. “I would put it, in many ways, in the category of the U.S. or [China], although smaller, just in terms of its overall capabilities.” Both Iran and Israel are powerful cybersecurity actors. Experts said that cyber disruption and espionage operations are often conducted in the background of direct military clashes. Tel Aviv has a skilled cyber talent pool and close-knit relations between the government and the private sector. It is also considered to have stronger cyber capabilities and advanced technology, enabiling more sophisticated digital attacks. While Iran is considered a major rival power to Western countries — alongside China, North Korea and Russia — its cyber operations are primarily focused on espionage rather than disruption. Iran’s nuclear program has also been the target of one of the most infamous cyberoffensive operations in history: The U.S. and Israel were reportedly behind the Stuxnet malware attack that significantly damaged the country’s nuclear efforts in 2010. Sam Clark contributed reporting.

EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič will hold a call with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on Friday as the two sides seek a basis for negotiation to head off a transatlantic trade war, a European Commission spokesperson told POLITICO. The call takes place just days after Brussels responded to the U.S. administration with a newly tweaked list of concessions it is willing to offer, as first reported by POLITICO. The call will take place in the late afternoon, said Commission trade spokesperson Olof Gill. “We’ve sent them what we think is an excellent, detailed, mutually beneficial proposal,” Gill added, standing by the EU’s approach in its talks with Washington. The new document aims at boosting purchases in strategic sectors, such as energy, as well as developing cooperation on 5G and 6G mobile networks. It would also ramp up strategic cooperation in sensitive sectors that have undergone trade investigations resulting in U.S. tariffs, such as steel and aluminum, semiconductors and cars. The recent exchange of letters sparked hope that talks between Brussels and Washington could finally make substantive progress, after weeks of mounting frustration over a lack of engagement from the Donald Trump administration. The Financial Times reported on Friday, however, that Greer was expected to reject the EU’s proposals, demanding unilateral concessions instead of mutually reducing tariffs. On top of a 10 percent tariff, Washington still imposes a 25 percent levy on cars as well as steel and aluminum. If no solution is reached by early July, a higher U.S. tariff of 20 percent would kick back in on most European goods.  The Commission insists it won’t accept a 10 percent baseline tariff. That was baked into a recent trade agreement struck between Washington and London. Greer and Šefčovič are expected to meet in Paris in early June, after the EU trade chief paid at least three publicly disclosed visits to Washington since Trump took office in January.

BRUSSELS ― Belgian authorities have asked the European Parliament to strip the immunities of a group of EU lawmakers so they can be investigated for their alleged involvement in a cash-for-influence scandal linked to the Chinese tech firm Huawei. The request, confirmed by three EU officials, comes two months since the allegations emerged. One official said five MEPs were affected: three from the center-right European People’s Party, one from the Socialists and one from the centrist Renew group. One of the officials said the authorities were also investigating Parliament staff. The names of the MEPs in question have not been made public but will be announced by Parliament President Roberta Metsola on May 21 at the opening of a plenary session. The Parliament’s legal affairs committee will then decide whether to strip the immunities, in a process that could take as little as four weeks if fast-tracked, or up to a year in sensitive cases. Daniel Attard, a Maltese Socialist MEP, is part of the group, he said on social media on Monday. He said he was being investigated in connection with the Huawei probe for attending a football match in September at the box that Huawei has in the Anderlecht football stadium in Brussels. “I was not made aware that the invitation originated from any company, or that it involved a corporate box,” he said. “It has since emerged that the invitation came from a person who is currently under investigation by the Belgian authorities and who intended to speak to me about Huawei during the match.” Attard said that following a subsequent meeting in the Parliament with the company’s representatives, which he says he declared, he “had no further communication and took no action whatsoever in relation to Huawei or any matters related to the company.” Authorities are also investigating seven MEPs who signed a letter sent in February 2021 to three EU commissioners, in which they argued geopolitical tension should not hinder the development of 5G equipment in Europe, a move that would benefit the Chinese tech giant. Belgian authorities are looking into whether these lawmakers have been paid for their signatures. It is unclear whether the waiver requests target these lawmakers. At least eight people have been charged by the Belgian prosecutor — including one of Huawei’s most senior executives in Europe — with active corruption, money laundering and criminal organization, after a series of police raids of premises in Belgium, France and Portugal. An MEP’s parliamentary assistant has also been charged but an Italian court refused to hand her over to Belgian authorities at the end of April despite an active European arrest warrant. The Belgian prosecutor’s office declined to comment. A Parliament spokesperson said: “Any request is only public once announced in plenary – the requests are announced at the earliest plenary after reception.” Elisa Braun contributed reporting.

The European Union is set to admit that untangling from the dominance of U.S. tech companies is “unrealistic” as fears grow over the bloc’s dependence on American giants. A draft strategy seen by POLITICO ahead of its release this spring signals the EU has few fresh ideas to restore Europe as a serious player in global tech — even as responding to the new transatlantic reality becomes a top priority in Brussels. The return of United States President Donald Trump to the White House and his combative stance toward Europe has revived concerns about sovereignty over fundamental technologies, including social media and cloud services, as well as about the potential access of U.S. law enforcement to data processed by ubiquitous giants Amazon, Microsoft and Google. In the context of escalating trade tensions and mounting hybrid threats, the EU will soon release its International Digital Strategy for Europe. “Tech competitiveness is an economic and security imperative for all aspiring to durable wealth and stability,” says a draft version dated April 9. Yet when it comes to dominant players such as the U.S., “decoupling is unrealistic and cooperation will remain significant across the technological value chain,” the draft says. It cites China as well as Japan, South Korea and India as countries with which collaboration will also be essential. The pitch for strategic tech alliances with like-minded countries — to team up on research and generate greater business opportunities for the bloc’s companies — comes in stark contrast to growing calls for a move toward protectionism. The strategy is more defensive on China, stating that the EU will seek to maintain its “leadership in promoting secure and trusted 5G networks globally” — essentially a nod to excluding Chinese vendors such as Huawei. | Mukhriz Hazim/EFE via EPA For Europe, “business as usual is no option,” wrote Marietje Schaake earlier this year. Schaake, a former Dutch liberal member of the European Parliament who is a leading voice on tech, called on the bloc to “end its debilitating dependence on American tech groups and take concrete steps to shield itself from the growing dangers of this new, tech-fueled geopolitical landscape.” In Brussels, the idea of a “Eurostack” — an ambitious industrial plan to break free from U.S. tech dominance — is gaining steam, with key lawmakers throwing their weight behind the proposal. The draft strategy backs international engagement on critical technologies such as quantum and chips — as “the growing complexity of semiconductor supply chains and geopolitical uncertainty necessitate a tailored, country-specific approach.” The EU has been scrambling to fix, among other things, a risky reliance on China for low-tech chips. Cooperation could also include building prized artificial intelligence factories outside the bloc to help Europe grow its impact in the nascent technology, according to the draft. It should also include joined-up efforts on cybersecurity to crack down on ransomware. The strategy is more defensive on China, stating that the EU will seek to maintain its “leadership in promoting secure and trusted 5G networks globally” — essentially a nod to excluding Chinese vendors such as Huawei. Brussels and Washington have been joining forces for years to tame the technology giant’s global ambitions, using digital diplomacy tools to convince third countries to ditch equipment from the Shenzhen-based firm. The draft proposes extending that model to subsea cables, whose network map should be built “with like-minded countries.” The strategy is set to be presented June 4 according to the latest European Commission agenda.

BRUSSELS — European Union auditors on Monday warned that the bloc is dangerously reliant on China for mainstream microchips powering everything from cars to washing machines. In a report published on Monday, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) said one in three low-tech chips comes from China. It warned the EU is “nowhere close” to meeting its own goal of making up 20 percent of the global value chain for microchips by 2030, a target set in its 2023 European Chips Act that intended to make the bloc less reliant on foreign regions. The report is yet another sign that the EU is struggling to reduce some of its most glaring dependencies on foreign technology for critical and essential services, despite attempts by Brussels to make the bloc more “technologically sovereign.” Europe has some leading companies in the field of less advanced microchips, including Germany’s Infineon, the Dutch NXP and French-Italian STMicroelectronics. These firms cater to the needs of Europe’s powerful car industry. But the auditors wrote that demand in Europe “is currently growing more quickly than EU-based chipmakers can supply it.” In 2024, the EU ran a €9.8 billion deficit with China on chips; it also had deficits with other chipmaking hubs like Taiwan. Globally, Taiwan has emerged as the leading hub for more advanced chips, which have smaller nodes than low-tech varieties and are used in smartphones and data centers. But demand remains high for low-tech chips as well, including to power the transition to more sustainable, less energy-consuming technologies. The auditors warned that the gap Europe has with other regions will only widen. “As this type of microchip is needed for technology associated with the green transition, this trade deficit is likely to increase in the future.” As the EU’s independent auditor, the Court of Auditors reviews the EU’s finances, its spending and the implementation of its policies. The auditors’ message arrives as Brussels gets ready to review its Chips Act, which formulated the goal of 20 percent by 2030. The auditors dismissed that goal as “aspirational” and not grounded in reality. Last July, the Commission acknowledged the goal was far from attainable, projecting that the EU would hit 11.7 percent in 2030 rather than 20 percent. The EU executive has been investigating the bloc’s reliance on China for low-tech chips. Last year it surveyed microchip suppliers and their customers about the older-generation technology used in cars, household appliances and medical devices over fears that China-subsidized firms were undermining them. That move was coordinated with Washington under then-President Joe Biden, which ran a similar survey. Annemie Turtelboom, a member of the Court of Auditors, said geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and the EU have made the issue of reducing dependencies even more pressing than a year ago. “We already know about the risks that come with importing from countries [with which] we have an uncertain relationship. But maybe we cannot even rely on our traditional allies for the supplies of chips,” she said. European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said in a response that the Chips Act was “a strong foundation” after two decades in which Europe’s share had declined, and that it had “put Europe back on a path of growth.”