The Sovereignty Debate in Digital Spaces: A Global Perspective

Historical Context

The conversation around sovereignty in digital networks isn’t a fresh topic. It gained notable traction back in 1996 when John Perry Barlow’s “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” boldly challenged the idea of government control over the internet. This foundational text set the stage for ongoing debates about how digital spaces should be governed and who should wield power within them.

In contrast, nations like China have been vocal proponents of state control over the internet for over a decade. More recently, figures like U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance have echoed sentiments of technological sovereignty, particularly regarding artificial intelligence (AI). Vance stated that the U.S. remains the leader in AI, expressing intentions to maintain this lead with advanced semiconductor designs and state-of-the-art applications.

Emerging Frameworks

These ambitions were formalized in America’s AI Action Plan, introduced in July, which promotes the establishment of an American AI framework as a standard for global use. This includes everything from advanced chip-making to AI applications. The U.S. has recently even acquired a 10% equity stake in Intel, indicating a robust strategy for investment in key technological sectors to enhance its competitiveness.

However, asserting sovereignty over the entire AI technology stack—from rare earth minerals to model training infrastructure—poses significant challenges. Each layer of the AI stack represents unique expertise and strategic control points that influence economic, political, and security dynamics. Currently, the U.S. and China dominate the AI landscape, forcing other countries into a dilemma of alignment with one or the other or seeking a middle path.

Global Initiatives in Sovereign AI

Countries worldwide are taking measures to develop their own versions of “sovereign AI.” Initiatives are emerging in several regions, including the African Union, India, Brazil, and the European Union. The urgency of these efforts has brought in a broader base of supporters, advocating for control over crucial components in the AI stack. Advocates argue that holding sway in at least part of the AI ecosystem is essential for economic competitiveness, cultural preservation, national security, and establishing global norms.

Europe stands out with its call for digital sovereignty, particularly due to its current strategic vulnerabilities. Europe comprises only 10% of the global microchip market, and a significant number of its member states rely on U.S. cloud providers. This reality has fueled calls for self-sufficient alternatives in technology, along with initiatives like Gaia-X, aimed at promoting Europe’s own digital infrastructure.

The Context of Privacy and Data Sovereignty

European concerns surrounding digital sovereignty intertwine with extensive issues of privacy and surveillance, spotlighted by the 2013 Edward Snowden revelations. These events reignited debates over transatlantic data flows, causing substantial legal repercussions, such as the invalidation of both the Safe Harbor agreement and the subsequent Privacy Shield framework. Legislative actions have since intensified, notably through detailed regulations like the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act, aimed at curbing the dominance of major U.S. technology firms.

Despite historical tensions, the push for a sovereign AI infrastructure gained momentum in 2025, primarily spurred by evolving U.S. foreign policies and changes in trade dynamics. The growing realization among European policymakers is that reliance on the U.S. AI stack can pose risks that may be manipulated by shifting political tides.

The Case for a Third AI Stack

Beyond sovereignty lies the rationale for establishing a “third AI technology stack.” A framework led by Europe would diversify the market beyond the current U.S. and Chinese divisions, introducing meaningful competition. It could also highlight values-based innovation, emphasizing principles of transparency, trust, and accountability— qualities increasingly sought after by consumers. A European-led AI stack could set a higher standard for data governance and environmental impact.

Global AI Market Composition

The geopolitical landscape of AI is often characterized by two dominant players: the U.S. and China. The United States boasts substantial market dominance through its established tech firms and alliances in organizations like the G7 and OECD. Meanwhile, China’s influence grows through initiatives like the Digital Silk Road and the promotion of a Global AI Governance Action Plan.

Establishing a robust EU presence in the global AI industry could facilitate the emergence of a third path grounded in democratic values, yet the feasibility of such aspirations warrants scrutiny.

Pragmatic Approaches to Sovereignty

While the vision for an independent AI stack sounds compelling, the reality is far more complex. No region, including the U.S. or Europe, possesses complete control over the entire AI stack. For instance, the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is integral to producing Nvidia’s chips, relying on advanced EUV lithography machines from the Dutch firm ASML, underscoring the intricate interdependencies in global technologies.

These global interdependencies highlight a long-term evolution of expertise that isn’t easy to replicate, regardless of national priorities. The U.S. has initiated policies like the CHIPS and Science Act focused on semiconductor manufacturing, yet the challenge remains to build a comprehensive ecosystem in isolation.

A Unified Global Response

To counter the dominance of U.S. and Chinese technologies, it’s essential for Europe to engage with a coalition of like-minded nations to establish a competitive third AI stack. Potential partners may include countries like Brazil, Canada, India, South Korea, and the United Arab Emirates, which possess valuable expertise in various segments of the AI stack.

Encouragingly, proponents of this coalition recognize that fostering ties with these countries is vital. For example, Korea’s Samsung is making strides as a leader in semiconductor revenue, while Japan’s Canon and Nikon are exploring innovative lithography techniques, all of which can feed into a collaborative AI framework.

Addressing Institutional Challenges

However, establishing such collaborative efforts requires a clear strategy highlighting mutual interests. The varied political landscapes of potential partners must be navigated thoughtfully to avoid fragmentation. There is a pressing need for Europe to confront its “inconvenient truths,” such as fragmented telecom providers that restrict market scalability.

More cohesive strategies could invigorate Europe’s industrial sectors, such as automotive and finance, which increasingly rely on advanced AI solutions to remain competitive globally. The proliferation of collaborative efforts could stimulate further innovation across Europe’s startup ecosystems, which have historically faced challenges in achieving scale before being acquired by larger tech firms.

Funding and Investment Challenges

A resilient third AI stack will necessitate substantial financial commitments. European industrial leaders have shown support for these initiatives, but there remains an ongoing challenge in leveraging private capital. Strategies like the AI Gigafactories and procurement incentives demonstrate a recognized need for investment, yet actual funding levels must reach scale to be competitive.

Despite ambitious funding targets—like the €300 billion goal set over ten years—there is a chasm between Europe’s readiness and the financial clout of global competitors motivated to enhance their capabilities. The U.S. tech giants continue to dominate in funding and innovation, making Europe’s task significantly more challenging.

The Path Forward

In this interconnected landscape, maintaining a competitive edge requires more than just introspection; it calls for strategic alliances that extend beyond Europe. Collaborations with established tech powerhouses like Samsung and Infosys, alongside public-private partnerships, may secure the necessary investments and expertise for a viable alternative to the existing frameworks.

The future of AI, especially in the context of a potential third stack, hinges upon coordinated efforts at the global stage—merging democratic principles with pragmatic innovation to overcome looming competitive challenges from established players in the U.S. and China. Taking proactive steps and fostering collaboration may position Europe as a significant player, ensuring it captures its fair share of the international AI market.