Between digital dominance and democratic freedom: how can Germany and Europe strengthen their digital sovereignty? Rebecca Lenhard, spokesperson for digital policy for the Greens in the Bundestag, provides some answers.
The issue of ‘digital sovereignty’ has been a topic of discussion among experts for a very long time, but it has now also entered the European political discourse, particularly since Trump’s second term and the Franco-German Digital Summit in autumn 2025. In your opinion, what are the most pressing challenges facing European and German digital policy with regard to digital sovereignty? From a Green perspective, which dependencies are of particular concern to you?
The key challenge is that, whilst the German government now proclaims digital sovereignty, it has so far often continued to fund digital dependency. As long as we remain structurally dependent on a handful of non-European providers for cloud services, chips, AI and administrative software, we remain vulnerable – not only economically, but also in terms of security policy and, ultimately, democracy. From a Green perspective, we therefore finally need a genuine shift in strategy: away from short-term convenience, towards resilient, open and European digital structures.
For Green digital policy, it is crucial that digital sovereignty is not misunderstood as isolationism. Nor is it about becoming self-sufficient in everything. What matters is that we are capable of acting independently in key areas, have freedom of choice, become more resilient and specifically reduce critical dependencies. This means: strengthening open standards, promoting open source in a targeted manner, strategically building up European providers and public digital infrastructures, realigning public procurement, and using the state as an anchor customer for sovereign technologies. Precisely if we in Europe wish to safeguard democratic control, data protection, sustainability and fair competitive conditions, we must finally recognise digital sovereignty as a core task of industrial, innovation and democratic policy.
The Federal Ministry for Digital Affairs and State Modernisation (BMDS) is the newest federal ministry, tasked with centrally driving forward Germany’s digitalisation and establishing Germany as an attractive digital business hub. In your view, is the BMDS already taking steps towards the goal of making Germany and Europe more digitally sovereign? In your opinion, what measures should the BMDS take to advance Germany’s digital sovereignty?
The BMDS set out with the aim of making digitalisation more strategic, effective and sovereign. However, I see only very limited evidence that it has lived up to this aim so far. Particularly when it comes to digital sovereignty, there has so far been a lack of robust monitoring and a genuine strategic overview: where does the state’s greatest digital dependence lie? In which areas are there realistic European alternatives? And where do we need to invest specifically so that well-meaning announcements finally translate into concrete sovereignty policy? It is precisely this systematic overview that is a prerequisite for being able to act effectively at all. That is why we Greens called for such an assessment as early as last autumn. However, the Black-Red coalition rejected this motion. In response to my regular enquiries, the Federal Ministry for Digital and Security (BMDS) has made it clear that it has no intention of introducing such an assessment at this stage. Unfortunately, we see time and again what politics looks like in practice without such an assessment: rather than living up to its own slogan #WirMachen, it all too often seems more like #WirMachenUnsAbhängiger [We Are Making Ourselves More Dependent]
Yet others have long shown that there is another way. Following the Franco-German sovereignty summit, the French government specifically mandated that the French administration switch to a European video conferencing system and also move from Microsoft products to open-source solutions for its operating systems. Schleswig-Holstein, too, is demonstrating very clearly that digital sovereignty need not remain a theoretical debate. There, the transition to a digitally sovereign IT workplace was strategically planned and implemented step by step.
Such concrete steps are also needed at federal level. For it is precisely now that investment decisions for the future are being made on issues such as the cloud, administrative software, AI infrastructure and data centres. If digital self-determination is not taken into account from the outset, we will further entrench existing dependencies instead of finally reducing them. The Federal Ministry of Digital and Communications (BMDS) repeatedly emphasises the importance of digital sovereignty. So far, however, this has too often remained at the level of declarations rather than binding political decisions.
The EU has recently adopted a comprehensive AI Act, which Germany must now implement. To what extent does the AI Act support Germany’s digital sovereignty, and what particular considerations must we bear in mind during implementation?
“Digital sovereignty also means having the courage to set one’s own standards and defend them against external political and economic pressure. “
The AI Act helps Germany’s and Europe’s digital sovereignty, first and foremost, because it creates a common European legal framework. Instead of a patchwork of individual national rules, the EU is thus establishing harmonised, risk-based rules for AI and formulating its own European regulatory framework designed to combine security, fundamental rights and trust with innovation. This is also a form of digital sovereignty: Europe is defining the rules for the use of AI in its single market itself, rather than being driven solely by the business models and standards of a handful of global corporations.
This is precisely why it is so important now that Europe does not back down on these rules. Digital sovereignty also means having the courage to set one’s own standards and defend them against external political and economic pressure. Unfortunately, we are currently seeing time and again that European digital laws are being used as bargaining chips in transatlantic customs and trade disputes. With the AI Omnibus, too, there is a risk that protection standards will be watered down or that rules will be postponed yet again. That would send a disastrous signal. For digital sovereignty means that Europe sets its own rules and that everyone must abide by them. Naturally, this should also apply to the major US tech corporations when they do business in our single market.
What is the state of user sovereignty in the digital world? For a long time, the internet was seen as a visionary force for creativity, exchange and freedom of expression. Today, the situation is completely different – digital policy is characterised by surveillance capitalism, Big Tech monopolies and the battle for our attention. Can this course be reversed at all? What needs to be done to reclaim the internet?
The question of digital sovereignty arises not only for states and authorities, but also, quite specifically, for users themselves. After all, digital sovereignty ultimately means that people must be able to decide for themselves how they communicate, which services they use, what happens to their data, and which digital spaces they trust. This is precisely what is often lacking today. Too many everyday digital spaces are designed in such a way that the focus is not on users, but on data collection, dependency and maximising attention retention.
This is precisely why initiatives such as Digital Independence Day are so important. It was launched at the end of 2025 by Save Social and the Chaos Computer Club, among others. Since early 2026, the initiative has been calling on people to consciously try out digital alternatives on the first Sunday of every month. The aim is to raise the profile of alternatives to Big Tech platforms and to strengthen digital independence, self-determination, transparency and resilience. I find it very encouraging that this is also linked to a positive narrative: understanding digital sovereignty not merely as a defence against dependencies, but as a concrete invitation to rediscover and utilise self-determined digital spaces.
“Too many everyday digital spaces are designed in such a way that the focus is not on users, but on data collection, dependency and maximising attention retention.”
Experts and organisations within digital civil society also make an indispensable contribution to this. They provide essential information resources, strengthen digital skills and open up opportunities for citizens to participate in digital policy. In doing so, they are a key building block of citizens’ digital self-determination and, ultimately, of Europe’s digital sovereignty. That is why they must be given stronger support and sustained funding.
Finally, we have an invitation for you to dream: where could Germany be in five years’ time if the right decisions are made now?
If we make the right decisions now, Germany could be significantly more self-determined, fairer and better equipped to act in the digital sphere in five years’ time than it is today.
I imagine a country where public administrations are no longer dependent on a handful of non-European corporations, but instead rely more heavily on open standards, interoperable systems and European technologies. A country where citizens can use digital services that simply work, are trustworthy and incorporate IT security and ‘privacy by design’ from the outset. A country where the state uses its purchasing power strategically to strengthen innovation, open source and European providers, rather than further entrenching existing dependencies. And a country that approaches digital infrastructure not only as high-performance but also as sustainable – that is, energy-efficient, resource-conserving and in line with our climate and environmental goals.
But just as important to me is a Germany that does not misunderstand digital sovereignty as a retreat or digital isolation. My goal is not a digital Europe in isolation, but a sovereign Europe that is closely networked internationally with democratic, reliable partners who share our values. It would be naïve and reckless to believe that Europe can be digitally self-sufficient in all areas. But that is not the point. For it is precisely in a networked world that strength arises through fair cooperation on equal terms, common standards and resilient partnerships.
I also hope that we will finally discuss AI in a less hysterical and, at the same time, more responsible manner. In other words, neither as a pure saviour nor as a mere threat, but as a technology that is used wisely where it can create genuine social added value: in medicine, in research, in the energy transition or in accessible participation. At the same time, the rules governing this would be clear, transparent and subject to democratic oversight.
And I envisage a digital ecosystem in which users once again have greater freedom of choice, in which digital civil society is strengthened, and in which it is taken for granted that digital self-determination is not merely a matter for government departments, but is felt in people’s everyday lives.
If we are bold now, Germany can demonstrate in five years’ time that digitalisation does not necessarily have to lead to new dependencies on individual Big Tech companies. It can also enable greater self-determination, greater participation and greater democratic influence.
this interview was first published in German on boell.de. The questions were asked by Corinna Vetter and Lovisa Claesson.
The views and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect those of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung European Union | Global Dialogue.
