Search

Begin New Search Topic Digital Sovereignty Publication Year within 3 Years

1. State Goals, Private Tools: Digital Sovereignty and Surveillance Along the Belt and Road

Author:
Che Chang, Lian Huang, and Athena Tong
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
Beijing promotes digital sovereignty in its engagements with other countries but with the caveat that it can maintain access to partner countries’ digital systems. Leaked documents from cyber contracting firm iS00N indicate a focus on One Belt One Road partner countries, targeting critical systems, including telecoms, government ministries, and financial institutions. A new paradigm of using nominally private firms allows Beijing to put distance between its inclusive rhetoric of “win-win cooperation” while companies hack partner countries’ infrastructure at the direction of its security services.
Topic:
Cybersecurity, Surveillance, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
China and Asia

2. No end in sight to the global sprint towards digital sovereignty in 2023 (and beyond)

Author:
Katarina Vehovar
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
Even a cursory glance at headlines in Foreign Affairs – “How AI Makes Dictators More Dangerous”, “The Insidious Cyberthreat” and “The Autocrat in Your iPhone” - suggests that 2022 was not the best year for cyber optimists who profess a belief in technology’s democratising power (González 2022). Digital authoritarian systems and “spin dictatorships” continue relying just as much on information manipulation as coercion to consolidate their power (Guriev 2022). Meanwhile, concerns over the use of sophisticated mercenary surveillance systems and invasive AI technology in democracies are also mounting (Deibert 2022).
Topic:
International Relations, Science and Technology, Authoritarianism, Cyberspace, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Open strategic autonomy: The digital dimension

Author:
Maaike Okano-Heijmans
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
In recent years the European Union (EU) and its member states hesitantly embarked on a new and ambitious path towards what came to be called ‘digital and technological autonomy’. This paradigm shift involves a turn away from the market-based, open economy thinking that has dominated in European policy circles in recent decades. The new direction is towards a geostrategic, more closed economy thinking, with a shift from a focus on trade to technology.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Sovereignty, European Union, Leadership, Strategic Autonomy, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Digital Sovereignty: For a Schuman Data Plan

Author:
Arno Pons
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
On 9 January, the European Commission launched the first cooperation and monitoring cycle for the achievement of the European Union’s digital decade by 2030. If, in the digital field, Europe faces issues of sovereignty, it is because it has left the sector open for over twenty years to the American Tech giants, who have imposed a game whose rules that have never been understood here. Either because these rules were inaccessible to the European Union (Moore and Metcalfe laws), or because we accepted that there were no rules of the game (code is law).
Topic:
Markets, Science and Technology, Infrastructure, Law, European Union, Data, European Commission, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Europe

5. Digital Sovereignty: European Policies, American Dilemmas

Author:
Mathilde Velliet
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
European digital sovereignty has been made a priority by Ursula von der Leyen’s European Commission. Due to the privileged position of American companies in the European market, Brussels’ efforts towards digital sovereignty (on privacy, antitrust, data sovereignty, etc.) are closely scrutinized by American policymakers. They often view European initiatives as “protectionist” and unfairly targeting U.S. companies. However, the American vision of European digital sovereignty has evolved in recent years under the influence of two main factors. On the one hand, awareness of the problematic effects and practices of platforms has led to a consensus on the need for reform in the digital sector. On the other hand, technological competition with China has been elevated to a priority. This vision remains fraught with contradictions, along inter-party, intra-party, inter-agency, state-federal, and issue-based fault lines. Washington’s position on anti-monopolistic practices is an illuminating example, characterized by a double discourse between a desire to reform the U.S. digital sector domestically and active diplomacy to dilute these efforts at the European level. Nonetheless, several American actors – particularly in the legislative branch – are seeking to learn from the successes and flaws of European regulations for American reform projects, such as on platform regulation or privacy. The China factor reinforces the ambiguity of the U.S.’ position. It creates new opportunities for cooperation in the face of perceived common vulnerabilities (infrastructure security, inbound investments, etc.) and autocratic definitions of digital sovereignty. However, it also raises tension and misunderstanding on the American side towards European reforms that often target American companies more than Chinese ones. Lastly, while American and European companies have adapted to the need for digital sovereignty through a range of technical and commercial solutions, the temptation of a maximalist definition of European sovereignty continues to create major stumbling blocks, particularly on the cloud.
Topic:
European Union, Regulation, Cloud Computing, Digital Sovereignty, and Data Governance
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

6. Reification of Data: the Right to be Forgotten, Data Ownership, Network Usage Fee, and Data Sovereignty

Author:
Kyung-Sin Park
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
A regression is taking place around the world: the reification of data. Data is a relationship between sentient beings and the objects sensed, knowledge of the world external to the consciousness of that being. Transfer of data is speech. Collection of data is learning. Thus, a restriction on the transfer of data is a restriction on speech or the freedom of speech.1 A restriction on the collection of data becomes a restriction on learning or the freedom to learn. Data—origi- nally, a configuration of the consciousness perceiving external objects—is being rei3ed, that is, treated as if it is a tangible thing. Increasingly, data is deemed to be a possession by people reflected in it or those producing it and subject to delivery fees for transfer. Data is deemed capable of being “owned by data subjects,” “owned by data producers,” or charged fees for delivery.2
Topic:
Science and Technology, Networks, Data, Digital Sovereignty, and Right to be Forgotten
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Europe and the Geopolitics of 5G Walking a Technological Tightrope

Author:
Julien Nocetti
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
The acute Sino-American tensions which started in 2018 have been coupled with controversies around 5G technology, exemplified by the spotlight placed on Chinese equipment manufacturer Huawei and the security risks associated with its use. For Europe, the 5G challenge at the international level is drawing a very complex landscape. Just like artificial intelligence, 5G materializes a very strong geopolitical sensitivity around the control of critical technologies. 5G is indeed critical because of its expected quasi-ubiquitous use, the gradual shift towards network technologies based entirely on software, and the potential strengthening of already dominant players (including digital platforms via cloud services). The United States-China rivalry is limiting the European Union’s room for action, against a backdrop of security considerations and low levels of investment. The continent’s various players (the European Commission, the main European powers, private players such as Nokia and Ericsson) have not adopted a uniform stance, reflecting an entanglement of technological dependencies on China and the United States. Meanwhile, the issue of semiconductors, symbolizing both the technological decline and the renewal of the EU’s ambitions, is fully integrated into the development of 5G. These chips constitute the "muscle" of the system and trigger new geo-economic challenges in which Europe must still find its place.
Topic:
European Union, Internet, 5G, Telecommunications, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

8. Digital Sovereignty Review of Macron’s Term and Debates in the 2022 Presidential Campaign

Author:
Alice Pannier
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
One month before the French presidential election, this briefing assesses the actions undertaken during Macron's term as well as the presidential candidates' proposals concerning France's digital sovereignty. Emmanuel Macron’s five-year term has been characterized by notable efforts to reinforce French digital sovereignty through regulation, securing industries and infrastructures, and supporting strategic sectors. The candidates running for the 2022 presidential election tend to also adopt a maximalist view of sovereignty, which in the digital domain is not limited to data protection, but also includes an industrial component. While all the candidates denounce the current government’s policy on cloud computing, their other proposals in the digital domain are generally in line with the action taken since 2017. However, the weakness of the candidates’ proposals on the international dimension of technology is problematic, at a time when partners and rivals are articulating their foreign policies around these issues, with significant effects on Europe’s efforts toward digital sovereignty.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Emmanuel Macron, Presidential Elections, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Europe and France