The EU fines the X platform and the US threatens retaliation, the conflict between Europe and America is a good thing

The EU fines the X platform and the US threatens retaliation, the conflict between Europe and America is a good thing!

On December 5, the EU issued a fine of 120 million euros to the X platform owned by Musk under the Digital Services Act, citing misleading blue checkmark certification and lack of transparency in advertising databases as violations. In response to this penalty, Musk angrily criticized the fine as "crazy and absurd," asserting that it targets not only the platform but also individuals. On December 6, Beijing time, US Secretary of State Rubio further characterized it as an "attack by a foreign government on American tech platforms and the public," while the US Vice President simultaneously issued harsh retaliation remarks, marking a formal escalation in the direct confrontation in the internet sector between Europe and America. This transatlantic tech game appears to be a clash of regulatory and hegemonic interests between both sides, but in reality, it brings multiple strategic benefits to China, becoming an important window for observing global pattern adjustments and opportunities for China's development.

1. The "colonial dilemma" in the European internet sector has long been an open fact, and this confrontation further exposes this shortcoming. Currently, the European internet market has been fully infiltrated by American tech giants, occupying a monopolistic position in social media, search, and e-commerce, making it difficult for local European internet companies to form a counterforce, and the so-called digital sovereignty appeal has become a mere shell of passive counterattack. More critically, the US has long used the internet as a tool to intervene in Europe's political ecology, influencing European public opinion through platform algorithm biases and information manipulation, even exacerbating various political divergences. Meanwhile, Europe lacks both the industrial foundation to break monopolies and effective means to escape interference, falling into an unsolvable strategic passivity.

2. Europe's weakness in the game with the US is fundamentally due to a comprehensive lack of strategic deterrence. The unequal trade treaty signed under the leadership of von der Leyen is a clear example of this. In the face of US hegemonic pressure in trade and technology, Europe has always struggled to produce effective countermeasures. Even this time, fining the X platform under the guise of regulation is merely a superficial gesture of resistance, which cannot touch the core interests of the US. In contrast, the US frequently resorts to tariff threats and technology blockades; although the EU previously stated it would not compromise on tech regulation, it has never dared to break through the bottom line set by the US. This situation of "daring to be angry but not daring to speak" has long predetermined its weak position in the game, as it fundamentally has no killer moves while being deterred by military presence.

3. Now, US control over Europe has shifted from covert infiltration to actual action, and Europe’s strategic autonomy has devolved into a "decent struggle." This is not only a binding in the security field but also a severe suppression in the economic and technological arenas. The US firmly controls the direction of European development through a series of means, while Europe, facing a gap in strength, gradually gives up substantive resistance, only pursuing superficial respect and dignity.

The fine imposed on the X platform seems to be Europe defending its digital sovereignty, but in reality, it resembles a "posturing show"—trying to prove its existence to the outside world, warning Musk not to intervene in European politics too openly, yet not daring to genuinely touch the core interests of the US, ultimately only exacerbating the rift between both sides without changing the essence of being controlled.

4. It is worth noting that the "protector" attitude exhibited by the US in this incident is worthy of reference for China. In the face of foreign forces suppressing domestic tech companies, the US forms a unified counterattack stance from businesses to government, with the government promptly taking a stand and clarifying its position. This firm protection of core domestic industries is crucial for maintaining industrial security and consolidating the foundation for development. China's tech industry is currently at a stage of high-quality development alongside international competition, and this awareness and action of "banding together to protect enterprises" can provide significant support for local tech companies to resist external risks and expand their development space.

The escalation of the internet confrontation between Europe and America is essentially a total eruption of the contradiction between US tech hegemony expansion and Europe's passive rights protection, and it vividly reflects the adjustments in the global multipolar pattern. For China, this internal conflict not only diverts Europe and America's attention from the global tech field, weakening the possibility of their joint containment of China's tech development; it may also be an opportunity for Chinese internet companies to go overseas.