By Angélique Bouchard
On December 23, 2025, the U.S. State Department announced a visa ban on five European figures, including former European Commissioner Thierry Breton, accused of seeking to “coerce” American platforms into censoring opinions they deem contrary to their views. This measure, described by Washington as “extraterritorial,” marks a new stage in the confrontation between the Trump administration and the European Union over digital regulation and the very idea of freedom of expression.
According to Roland Lombardi, geopolitologist and editor-in-chief of Le Diplomate media, “Pierre-Yves Rougeyron is right to recall that American McCarthyism emerged in the early 1950s from Washington’s panic following the ‘draw’ of the Korean War and the rise of the Soviet Union. Today, the EU’s new McCarthyism—this ‘witch hunt’ taking shape in Europe, embodied by the DSA and the frenzy of censorship of public debates deemed ‘sensitive’ on Ukraine, Covid, vaccines, or migration crises—reflects a panic within the pro-European and globalist establishment. Indeed, following his success in the United States with the re-election of Trump, backed by Musk, and in the face of the arrival on the Old Continent of this dual revolution—conservative and informational, driven by digital technologies—Europe’s progressive leaders are growing fearful. They know full well that they are losing their monopoly over information and, therefore, their power over increasingly angry populations… It is the twilight of their world, which makes them all the more dangerous.”
This decision is not an isolated outburst: it fits squarely into Donald Trump’s America First doctrine. Since returning to power, Washington has refused to let foreign bureaucrats dictate what Americans can say or read on their own platforms. The DSA, passed by the EU to “protect” citizens from “disinformation,” is in reality a tool to impose a global progressive vision: suppressing speech on immigration, climate, or elections that bothers the elites.
American conservatives have long seen it as a weapon against the right: Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter), a Trump ally, took the first big hit with a €120 million fine in December 2025 for failing transparency rules on advertising and “blue checks.” Breton personally threatened Musk ahead of his 2024 interview with Trump – an act viewed as blatant election interference.
More broadly, this digital war exposes Europe’s declining influence. The EU, squeezed between American giants (Meta, Google, X) and Chinese ones (TikTok), is trying to regain control through punitive regulation. But Trump is hitting back: suspending tech deals with the UK over its similar Online Safety Act, threatening tariffs, and now these visa bans. Result? European companies like Mistral, Siemens, or Spotify risk retaliation.
Geopolitically, it’s a strong signal: the United States will no longer allow Europe to export its woke censorship under the guise of “digital sovereignty.” While Brussels whines about its “democracy,” Washington defends free speech – the real kind, protected by the First Amendment.
À lire aussi : ANALYSE – Comores : L’offensive russe qui inquiète Paris — et menace l’équilibre autour de Mayotte
The Facts: Who Is Targeted and Why?
The five individuals affected are:
• Thierry Breton, former European Commissioner for the Internal Market (2019-2024), described by the State Department as the “mastermind” of the Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU’s flagship legislation imposing content moderation, transparency, and data access obligations on major platforms.
• Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), an NGO (American but UK-led) specializing in fighting online hate and disinformation.
• Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon, leaders of HateAid, a German organization acting as a “trusted flagger” for DSA enforcement.
• Clare Melford, co-founder of the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a UK organization that rates news sites to steer advertising away from those deemed unreliable.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the decision by stating:
“President Trump has been clear: his America First foreign policy rejects violations of American sovereignty. Extraterritorial overreach by foreign censors targeting American speech is no exception.”
“These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have advanced censorship crackdowns by foreign states – in each case targeting American speakers and American companies. The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship.”
(Source: State Department statement, cited by Reuters, December 23, 2025)
Washington accuses these individuals of leading “organized efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetize, and suppress American viewpoints they oppose.”
This sanction falls under a visa restriction policy announced in May 2025, targeting foreigners responsible for “censorship” against protected U.S. speech.
Context: The DSA at the Heart of the Conflict
The Digital Services Act, democratically adopted by the European Parliament and all 27 member states, aims to hold platforms accountable for illegal content (hate, disinformation, child protection). According to the EU, it has no extraterritorial scope and applies only to services offered in the European market.
Yet the Trump administration sees it as an assault on American free speech, especially after the €120 million fine on X(formerly Twitter) in December 2025 for transparency failures in advertising and user verification (Source: European Commission, December 2025).
Thierry Breton, famous for his public clashes with Elon Musk, had threatened X with sanctions in 2024 ahead of Musk’s interview with Trump. Washington blames the DSA for burdening U.S. companies and enabling “censorship” of conservative voices.
In parallel, the U.S. suspended a $40 billion tech cooperation deal with the UK in mid-December 2025 over its Online Safety Act – seen as the DSA’s equivalent (Sources: Reuters, December 16, 2025; The Guardian).
À lire aussi : DÉCRYPTAGE – L’accord gazier entre la Hongrie, la Russie et la Turquie : Quand la géographie l’emporte sur la rhétorique européenne
European Reactions: Outrage and Defense of Sovereignty
France reacted sharply. Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot posted on X:
“France strongly condemns the visa restriction taken by the United States against Thierry Breton […] and four other European figures. The DSA was democratically adopted in Europe […] It has absolutely no extraterritorial reach and in no way concerns the United States.”
(Source: Jean-Noël Barrot’s X post, December 24, 2025; Reuters)
Thierry Breton himself denounced a “witch hunt,” comparing it to the McCarthy era:
“To our American friends: Censorship isn’t where you think it is.”
(Source: Thierry Breton’s X post, December 23, 2025; The Guardian, BBC)
The Global Disinformation Index called the measure an “authoritarian attack on free speech” and a “flagrant act of government censorship” (Source: Statement to CNN, December 23, 2025).
Analysis: A Diplomatic Escalation with Major Geopolitical Stakes
This decision is not isolated. Since summer 2025, the Trump administration has threatened sanctions against DSA officials and instructed diplomats to pressure European capitals (Reuters, August 2025). It embodies an “America First” vision where European regulation is seen as a threat to U.S. digital sovereignty and Big Tech competitiveness.
For the U.S., dominated by private platforms (Meta, Google, X), moderation falls under the First Amendment: more speech to counter bad speech. Europe, shaped by its history, favors a proactive approach against hateful content and disinformation, deemed essential to democracy.
This affair reveals a deep transatlantic divide on internet governance. If the EU holds its line – as Barrot asserts – it risks economic retaliation (tariffs, restrictions on European services). Conversely, yielding would weaken its digital sovereignty, a core pillar against the U.S. and China.
Trump is resetting the clock: America won’t bow to globalist censors. These visa bans, symbolic but potent, mark the start of a counter-offensive. Europe, weakened and divided, risks paying dearly for its regulatory hubris. Meanwhile, free platforms like X are thriving. America First triumphs – along with free speech.
In the short term, these symbolic visa bans could worsen EU-U.S. relations, already strained over trade and AI. In the long term, they raise the question: who sets the rules for the global cyberspace?
À lire aussi : ANALYSE – Liban : Au-delà du cessez-le-feu, le chemin du redressement de l’État
*
* *
Toward a Digital Cold War? The Geopolitical Stakes of a Transatlantic Escalation
In the short term, these sanctions – visa bans for Europeans eligible under ESTA – humiliate Brussels and its NGO allies. They send a clear message: anyone pushing “censorship” of conservative American voices will pay the price. Marco Rubio made it plain: the list can grow if Europe doesn’t back down. With threats of tariffs on European goods (digital taxes in the crosshairs) and tech export restrictions, Trump holds the economic levers to hurt.
Looking ahead, three scenarios emerge:
1. Escalation and Net Fragmentation: If the EU sticks to the DSA and keeps fining (like the €120 million on X), Washington could go further – sanctions on sitting commissioners, blocking trade deals, or even encouraging Big Tech to limit services in Europe. Outcome? An accelerated “splinternet”: a freewheeling American internet on one side, a hyper-regulated European one on the other. Platforms like X could apply lighter rules outside the EU, bolstering U.S. hegemony while isolating Brussels.
2. American Victory and European Retreat: Facing economic pain (loss of U.S. market access for firms like Mistral or Spotify, already on potential blacklists), some member states might crack. The “Brussels effect” would reverse: a divided EU on immigration and free speech could soften the DSA to avoid a trade war. It would be a triumph for Trump and Musk: the end of European regulatory arrogance, and an American-style free speech model imposed worldwide.
3. European Resistance and Anti-U.S. Alliance: If Paris and Berlin stand firm – as Barrot claims with “digital sovereignty” – the EU could retaliate: massive fines, data localization demands, or alliances with China on AI and digital standards. But let’s be realistic: Europe depends on U.S. tech. Such a stance risks accelerating its digital decline, leaving the field to Washington and Beijing.
Geopolitically, this exposes the true power balance: the U.S. controls the platforms (X, Meta, Google); Europe has only rules. Trump is exploiting this asymmetry to defend not just conservative free speech, but American supremacy in cyberspace – a strategic issue as vital as semiconductors or energy.
In 2026, expect more tensions: intense U.S. lobbying in European capitals, possible WTO appeals, and maybe data leaks or cyber incidents to ramp up pressure. Europe, hampered by internal divisions, risks paying dearly for its digital sovereignty dream. Meanwhile, true free speech – unfiltered by globalists – is gaining ground.
America First is no longer a slogan but a doctrine reshaping the digital world—and the meaning of free speech in the West. For now, Trump is in the lead.
#thierrybreton, #digitalsact, #dsa, #freespeech, #censorship, #americafirst, #trump2025, #euusrelations, #digitalwar, #techregulation, #elonnmusk, #xplatform, #bigtech, #wokecensorship, #firstamendment, #digitalsovreignty, #brusselseffect, #splinternet, #geopolitics, #transatlanticcrisis, #digitalcoldwar, #europeanunion, #usforeignpolicy, #platformregulation, #onlinesafetyact, #metaregulation, #googlepolicy, #techsanctions, #politicalcensorship, #freedomofexpression, #digitalgovernance, #globalinternet, #visaBan, #stateDepartment, #marcorubio, #regulatoryoverreach, #conservativerevolution, #informationwar, #sovereigntyrisk
Diplômée de la Business School de La Rochelle (Excelia – Bachelor Communication et Stratégies Digitales) et du CELSA – Sorbonne Université, Angélique Bouchard, 25 ans, est titulaire d’un Master 2 de recherche, spécialisation « Géopolitique des médias ». Elle est journaliste indépendante et travaille pour de nombreux médias. Elle est en charge des grands entretiens pour Le Dialogue.