Washington is waking up to the danger of a fair division in Europe

The Biden administration has expressed opposition to Europe’s potential plan to force Google, Netflix and other online platforms to pay telecom operators.

It’s the latest battle in the Splinternet war that threatens to torpedo dreams of a global Internet. China has built the Great Firewall, and its telecom leader Huawei wants to control underwater sea cables. Russia imposes censorship at home and launches cyberattacks abroad.

The new U.S. strategy for international cyberspace and digital policy aims to counter these authoritarian threats and strengthen ties with democratic allies. His target is China and Russia – and the potential danger emanating from Europe – a digital “sovereignty” program that would allow telecommunications companies to extract a so-called “fair share” from data-hungry U.S. streaming and cloud companies. These are the right priorities, but the Biden administration must avoid building its digital walls.

The main target of the new US strategy is China. “The United States wants to ensure that allies do not rely on Chinese-made undersea cables, data storage or cloud computing,” Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said in a speech launching the new U.S. strategy. “It is important that we work with trusted suppliers and exclude untrustworthy ones from the ecosystem.”

Russia is perceived not so much as an economic rival but as a cyber threat. He attacked Ukraine with tanks and planes – and bits and bytes. In interviews, Nate Fick, the State Department’s first major ambassador for cyberspace and digital policy, cited the case of Costa Rica, which suffered a devastating ransomware attack in 2022 by Russian-speaking hackers. The United States provided $25 million to help Costa Rica rebuild before the hack, and the country followed U.S. advice and rejected the use of Chinese technology in its 5G cellular networks.

While focusing on China and Russia, the new US cyber strategy also criticizes several pillars of Europe’s digital sovereignty agenda. Its position is “opposed to data localization, network charges, digital services taxes, and other market access barriers that contribute to the perception of increased control but in reality can often undermine growth and security goals.”

This is new. As Europe unleashed a tsunami of digital regulation that took aim at Silicon Valley, the Biden administration remained largely silent. However, European telecommunications operators are once again knocking on the doors of governments, asking for relief from Big Tech on the costs of building and operating their networks. This is a dangerous idea. It would upend the key internet principle of net neutrality, that everyone is treated equally online. Streaming and apps are driving customer demand for telecommunications services.

Worse still, if Europe forces American technology to pay telecommunications fees, this policy could continue to spread around the world. It has already arrived in Brazil, and the country’s telecommunications regulator has launched its second fair share consultation. The concept of equitable sharing may soon re-emerge on the UN’s International Telecommunication Union agenda as a way to facilitate the transfer of income to developing countries. The World Telecommunications Development Conference is planned for 2025.

After European telecommunications companies presented the fair share concept, many European governments and stakeholders expressed opposition. European telecommunications regulator BEREC expressed skepticism. However, French European Commissioner Thierry Breton took it as a call to arms. Fair share has now re-emerged under a different name in the Commission’s recent white paper on telecommunications.

While the United States last year raised concerns about fair participation in consultations on investment in European digital communications networks, Washington has been speaking out publicly in a clear and proactive manner. That’s significant. But the US must be consistent. While Secretary of State Blinken promotes a free, open Internet, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai abandoned long-standing demands from U.S. digital trade for the free flow of data at World Trade Organization talks.

The US must choose. It cannot promote data localization – and at the same time crusade for a democratic, open and secure Internet. Both positions are contradictory. Fair distribution is a bad idea. The same applies to data localization.

Fiona M. Alexander is a Senior Fellow in the Digital Innovation Initiative at CEPA. He is both a Distinguished Political Strategist-in-Residence at the School of International Service and a Distinguished Fellow at the Internet Governance Lab at American University in Washington. She is a former Commerce Department official specializing in technology policy.

Bandwidth is CEPA’s online journal dedicated to strengthening transatlantic cooperation on technology policy. All opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position or views of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis.