Making the Case for a Third AI Technology Stack: Europe’s Vision for Digital Sovereignty
By Brooke Tanner and Andrew W. Wyckoff
September 12, 2025
Center for Technology Innovation (CTI), Brookings Institution
As the global artificial intelligence (AI) landscape rapidly evolves, a significant debate has emerged regarding the control and sovereignty of the AI technology stack—the complex and multilayered infrastructure essential for developing and deploying AI systems. Currently dominated by the United States and China, experts argue for the necessity of a third AI technology stack led by Europe. Such a development could diversify global market competition, promote innovation aligned with democratic values, and offer an alternative foundation for countries concerned about overreliance on the existing AI powerhouses.
Understanding AI Sovereignty and the Current Landscape
The notion of sovereignty in digital networks and services is far from new. Since John Perry Barlow’s 1996 “Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace,” there have been ongoing discussions about whether governments should exert control or cede authority over digital infrastructure. In recent years, state control has become a focal point, especially as China has long advocated for greater government oversight of the internet.
In contrast, the U.S. government has emphasized maintaining technological leadership. Vice President J.D. Vance proclaimed in early 2025 that the U.S. is the global leader in AI, supported by an administration policy, “America’s AI Action Plan,” which calls for American AI technology—encompassing everything from advanced semiconductor design to transformational applications—to set the global standard. This commitment also saw increased government investment, such as a 10% stake acquisition in Intel.
The AI technology stack involves several critical layers: from rare earth mineral extraction and advanced chip manufacturing to cloud infrastructure and cutting-edge AI model training. Each of these layers represents expertise, innovation, and control points critical to economic competitiveness and national security.
Currently, the U.S. and China dominate the full AI stack, presenting most countries with a challenging choice: align with one of these geopolitical spheres or attempt to remain non-aligned. This situation has raised fears of an AI-induced digital divide and driven countries across the world—including the African Union, India, Brazil, and the European Union—to initiate sovereign AI strategies aimed at gaining control over parts of the AI stack.
Europe’s Drive Toward AI Sovereignty
Europe, in particular, has voiced strong aspirations for digital sovereignty. The European Union faces notable vulnerabilities in its digital infrastructure: it holds only about 10% of the global microchip market and relies heavily on U.S.-based cloud service providers. Native European cloud alternatives, like Gaia-X, have struggled to gain significant market traction.
Moreover, Europe experiences a persistent "brain drain" as AI startups and talent migrate to ecosystems in the U.S., Canada, and China, attracted by better funding and scaling opportunities. This dependency on foreign technology firms has been exacerbated by longstanding tensions over privacy and data protection. Revelations such as the 2013 Snowden disclosures stressed European privacy concerns, culminating in legal battles that invalidated key data transfer agreements between the EU and U.S.
Recent U.S. legislative moves, notably the 2018 CLOUD Act, have further heightened European anxieties by allowing U.S. law enforcement to access data held overseas, sparking fears over potential government overreach and surveillance.
In response, the European Commission has aggressively pursued regulatory frameworks to assert control over the digital space. Landmark laws such as the Digital Services Act (DSA), Digital Markets Act (DMA), the AI Act, and associated codes of practice showcase Europe’s determination to both protect consumer rights and regulate dominant technology platforms.
However, it was only around 2025—amplified by Vice President Vance’s speech, shifts in U.S. trade and foreign policy, and increased semiconductor export controls—that the call for a sovereign AI stack in Europe gained urgency. Leading voices like German MEP Axel Voss proclaimed a loss of reliability in the U.S. partnership, advocating for a "sovereign AI and secure cloud" within Europe. AI sovereignty proponents draw analogies between digital infrastructure and essential public services, emphasizing that reliance on foreign control over critical infrastructure like roads, water, and airports would be unacceptable.
The Global Imperative for a Third AI Stack
Beyond Europe’s concerns, there exists a broader global rationale for establishing a third AI technology stack. Such a stack would diversify a market currently segmented by U.S. and Chinese dominance and could ignite both technological and value-driven innovation. It holds the promise of fostering an alternative aligned with democratic ideals, emphasizing transparency, trustworthiness, accountability, and stringent data governance.
A European-led AI stack could differentiate itself by enforcing robust data protection norms, comprehensive monitoring and reporting standards, and sustainable environmental practices. This alternative ecosystem would allow countries worldwide to engage with AI technologies without choosing exclusively between the American and Chinese models.
Currently, the geopolitical AI landscape is primarily bipolar. The U.S. maintains market dominance and integration across global economic systems, underscored by leadership in groups such as the G7 and OECD. China advances its technology infrastructure through initiatives like its Digital Silk Road and BRICS coordination, pushing a competing vision for global AI governance.
Europe’s emergence as a third pathway rooted in democratic values offers the potential to shape a new global digital order. This pathway could set new standards for product features with consumer trust and fundamental rights at the forefront.
Challenges Ahead: Realism vs. Rhetoric
While the vision for a European-led third AI stack holds significant promise, maximalist goals of total AI sovereignty appear unfeasible in the near term. The complex, multi-layered nature of the AI technology stack and entrenched global supply chains mean that no single actor can realistically exert control over all components independently. Instead, Europe’s efforts necessitate building on existing diplomatic relationships, forging new partnerships—ideally including the U.S.—and leveraging strengths beyond conventional diplomacy.
Existing initiatives may lay some groundwork, but forging a resilient and competitive third AI stack is a formidable undertaking. Balancing technological ambition, economic feasibility, and geopolitical realities will determine the trajectory of Europe’s digital sovereignty ambitions.
Conclusion
The case for a third AI technology stack championed by Europe is compelling as the world grapples with AI’s transformative impacts and associated geopolitical risks. While the journey toward AI sovereignty is complex and resource-intensive, Europe’s leadership in this area could foster not only a more diversified global AI ecosystem but also a digital environment that better aligns with democratic principles and global norms.
The coming years will reveal whether this vision materializes from rhetoric into reality and how it reshapes the global AI landscape.
For more information or media inquiries, please contact the Governance Studies Media Office at [email protected] or call 202.540.7724. —
This article is part of the Center for Technology Innovation’s ongoing commentary on technological advancements, governance, and their implications for global society.
