Are ideologically closer than Europe: Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.Image: keystone
For decades, the USA supported European unification. Now suddenly things are going in the other direction. This couldn’t be more convenient for the Kremlin.
Dec 9, 2025, 5:11 amDec 9, 2025, 5:11 am
Remo Hess, Brussels / ch media
The EU’s €120 million fine against Elon Musk’s online platform X and the publication of the new US security strategy have led to a toxic mix that exploded over the weekend.
For 48 hours, things went haywire, especially on the Internet. While Elon Musk compared the EU to Nazi Germany and received a lot of official support from the US, Putin’s henchmen in Moscow also allied themselves with the American EU opponents.
Has the transatlantic alliance finally broken down? And what is the truth behind the accusations that censorship is being introduced in Europe?
The most important questions and answers.
How does the EU react to the frontal attack from the USA?
With restraint. Neither Chancellor Friedrich Merz nor French President Emmanuel Macron commented directly. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, whose institution is at the center of the storm, also remained silent.
Perhaps EU Foreign Affairs Representative Kaja Kallas summed it up best:
“Such statements from the USA are not new.”
However, the EU and the USA would remain allies. We will take care of domestic affairs ourselves.
The message is clear: If the transatlantic alliance collapses, it should not be the Europeans’ fault.
By the way: US President Donald Trump has not yet intervened in the dispute as of Monday afternoon.
Why are Putin’s henchmen applauding now?
In Europe, it was not only EU opponents such as AfD leader Alice Weidel who took up Musk’s pass to dissolve the EU. In Moscow, Kirill Dmitriev also expressed approval – after all, Putin’s envoy to the Ukraine negotiations with the USA. The Russian even went so far as to say that the EU had become an “enemy of freedom of expression” by reposting a post by Musk about European “Stasi commissioners” with corresponding commentary.
This is grotesque because Western online networks such as X, Facebook and Instagram are all blocked in Russia. When it comes to freedom of speech, Russia ranks 171st out of 180 in the world.
But the calculation of the Russian applause for Musk is clear: anything that weakens the unity of Europe is welcomed. Individual nation states are easier to manipulate than a united Europe. This is also the reason for the Kremlin’s continued support of anti-EU parties in Europe.
Is there really a problem with freedom of expression in Europe?
It’s not the same everywhere. But in general, European countries lead all rankings for freedom of speech, expression and the press. Musk himself shows that freedom of expression is not restricted: he can publish EU-Hitler comparisons without anyone doing anything about it.
However, there are restrictions when it comes to illegal content. This includes calls for violence, generally justifiable statements or the violation of copyrights. However, the specific design lies with the nation states.
The United Kingdom, which Musk particularly often criticizes because of its regulations against hate speech, is not even a member of the EU.
What is the argument with X really about?
It’s not about content, but about transparency. The EU criticizes the fact that the Blue Check system on Furthermore, so-called “bots” are a problem. These are robot accounts that automatically produce content and can be used for disinformation.
There is also a second investigation underway that is targeting X’s algorithm. This prioritizes certain accounts and posts over others, which also raises questions about transparency.
Another thing again is the dispute between the EU and the US tech giants when it comes to their monopoly-like position. The digital rules based on antitrust law apply here.
Does the USA also have a point in its criticism of the EU?
Yes. But not in the way Musk and Co. imagine with their brutal criticism. It’s about the so-called “democratic deficit”. This has been the subject of academic debate for decades.
In a nutshell: There is an executive overhang in the EU. This means that the member states have too much power, not too little, as is often rumored. This is because the EU Parliament, as the elected representative of the people, cannot propose any laws itself. And that the national governments in Brussels draw up laws as part of the legislature. This leads to a confusion of the separation of powers.
The argument about the democratic deficit only holds water if you understand the EU as a federal state. And as we all know, the EU is still a long way from achieving that.
Bonus: The EU Commission President and her commissioners are often described as “unelected EU bureaucrats”. In fact, they are nominated by democratically legitimate governments and confirmed by the EU Parliament in an election.
Does the dispute benefit Switzerland as a non-EU member?
As a European country that is not a member of the EU, Switzerland is increasingly coming under pressure to act. This is shown by the negotiations on Bilateral III and the institutional connection to the EU. But a collapse of the EU would hardly be in our country’s interest. On the contrary: the economic impact would be serious. Not to mention what an end to the European order would mean for the continent in terms of security policy. (aargauerzeitung.ch)