The European Commission has big plans. With the brand new EU Startup & Scaleup Strategy, it promises to make Europe the place to start, scale up and grow a technology company into a global player. The ambitions are not wrong: fewer rules, more money, smoother procedures and even a "Blue Carpet" for international talent. The message is clear: Choose Europe!
But while Brussels is building a startup Valhalla, we hear something more painful in the corridors of the Spinelli Building: despite all these grand dreams of autonomy, Europe continues to lean heavily on global players in areas such as AI, cloud and data, including leading American technology companies. The ambition of technological sovereignty is hampered by a reality in which Europe is still lagging behind in many areas. And the paradox is complete: precisely in strategic sectors, innovative companies often choose economic ecosystems where the conditions for rapid growth are already in place.
As recently as early June, Politico warned that European companies are "growing thanks to American tech, despite European rules." It shows that, for now, strategic autonomy in digital infrastructure is more ambition than reality. Not because the will is lacking, but because the necessary European alternatives still lack scale and maturity. So in the short term, European companies will have to continue to build on global platforms and infrastructures, simply because they offer the most stable, scalable and accessible solutions today. And this goes beyond just American players: Europe also depends on countries like China, South Korea and Taiwan for essential parts of the technology chain. Digital autonomy is thus not a question of breaking away from a region, but of structurally strengthening its own ecosystem.
The EU does not lack talent, research or good ideas, but it does lack capital, speed and consistency. European startups often get stranded in the "double valley of death": first in translating research into product, and then again in scaling up. Investment gets stuck in the early stages, while growth capital is rare, especially for capital-intensive deep tech. It is precisely in the sectors identified as strategic that the need for venture capital is greatest. Without rapid scale opportunities, many of these companies remain ultimately dependent on foreign investors and infrastructure.
In addition, the European market may be large on paper, but in practice it is actually often fragmented. Different tax systems, labor laws and capital markets make it difficult for young companies to operate across borders. The European Commission's Startup Strategy recognizes this and comes up with proposals such as a "28th regime" for companies, a kind of EU-wide legal vehicle that you can set up within 48 hours.
Promising, but implementation will be all-important. The same goes for the announced Scaleup Europe Fund, which from 2026 should close the funding gap for scale-ups. The idea is good, but whether the capital becomes available fast enough will be decisive for this instrument.
This brings us to the fundamental tension: there is a difference between a strategy and a system. While the EU Startup & Scaleup Strategy is ambitious and seems well-constructed policy-wise, it continues to operate within a system in which national fragmentation, risk-averse culture and slow bureaucratic decision-making is deeply ingrained.
So the idea is European, but the reality is often still national. That clashes. Especially as digital autonomy increasingly acquires a geopolitical dimension, Europe will have to look not only at policy but also at consistency in implementation.
Yet the strategy also offers real opportunities to do things differently. The focus on talent, for example, with proposals for tax harmonization and cross-border social security, shows that the Commission has understood that innovation in AI, cloud and deep tech also needs people precisely. In addition, the timing is right. The geopolitical context, from strategic autonomy to defense industry, means that startup policy is finally becoming geopolitically relevant.
So the European startup strategy is not a panacea, but it is a step toward making Europe truly attractive. The real test will be whether the implementation is as sharp and ambitious as the vision. Do member states really dare to take steps, or will it remain a lot of words but little action? In the current European system, that change will in any case first have to come from the member states. In doing so, the pursuit of digital sovereignty should not end in a fixation on independence of a country or region. Instead, Europe should focus on strengthening its own ecosystem: better access to growth capital, faster procedures, cross-border cooperation and a more attractive business environment.
Meer weten? Neem contact op met Roel Yska (roel@castro.lu).