Why we can’t escape the American digital stranglehold

A large-scale data investigation by the NOS (Dutch Broadcast Foundation) confirms this week what we in this newsroom have been signaling for some time: our vital infrastructure is entirely on the life support of American tech giants. From hospital records to government email, Dutch digital sovereignty is nowhere to be found. As early as February 2025, we warned of the risks of this one-sided dependency in the article "Trump has free rein over Dutch government data." That warning was no hollow cry. The combination of the American CLOUD Act and an unpredictable political climate in Washington makes our data vulnerable. While politicians in The Hague call for European alternatives, we seem to be making ourselves increasingly dependent on the US.

The hard numbers: a confirmation of the vulnerability

The scale of the dependency is alarming, although this comes as no surprise to those following this file. The NOS analysis of 16,500 domain names in the government, healthcare, and vital companies sectors shows that a staggering 67 percent are linked to American cloud services. Microsoft is the absolute market leader here, dominating nearly half of all examined domains. This isn't just about simple websites for tourist information. It touches the core of our society: patient records and government communication systems. In the healthcare sector, the picture is equally worrying. Of the seventy hospitals investigated, 29 were found to run their patient portal via an external, mostly American party.

This technical setup has direct geopolitical consequences. Data stored on the servers of American companies falls under American legislation. The CLOUD Act gives US intelligence agencies the authority to demand data, regardless of where the server is physically located. A datacenter in Eemshaven, therefore, offers only a false sense of security. The risks are not theoretical. The International Criminal Court in The Hague experienced firsthand what it means when the US imposes sanctions: its email traffic was simply shut off.

The political dilemma: wanting vs. being able to

There is a huge gap between the desire of the House of Representatives and the reality on the ministry work floors. Political The Hague is aware of the danger. It is not without reason that the House voted in March 2025 for a motion by Volt MP Koekkoek to accelerate investment in European cloud alternatives.

There is political will to regain digital autonomy and break Big Tech's power. They want to get rid of the "vendor lock-in" where one supplier dictates prices and conditions.

Yet in practice, we see the opposite happening. A painful example is the recent decision by the Tax and Customs Administration, Customs, and Benefits Service. Despite the known risks and political pressure, the tax authority decided to switch to Microsoft’s cloud for email and collaboration (Teams). The reasoning is sobering: the old systems were outdated, and according to the decision-makers, there was no European alternative available in the short term that could offer the same functionality and stability. However, the fear of American interference is so real that the Tax Authority spends an additional 2 million euros annually on continuous data backups. This is essentially an insurance premium against the risk of geopolitical blackmail. It perfectly illustrates the current powerlessness: we pay American companies for the service, and then pay extra to protect ourselves against those same companies.

The price of convenience: technical and cultural walls

Why does the Dutch government fail to push through to European solutions? The answer lies in a combination of technical complexity and human behavior. American tech giants do not deliver bare infrastructure; they deliver a complete ecosystem. They offer "convenience" through fully integrated services (SaaS and PaaS), whereas European providers often still provide primarily robust, basic infrastructure. For an IT department, switching to a European player often means having to build and maintain more in-house. That requires expertise that is scarce within the government.

Additionally, the cultural barrier is at least as high. Civil servants are used to the buttons in Outlook and Teams. As experiences in Aarhus, Denmark, teach us, the biggest resistance is often not technical, but human. People do not like change. If a European alternative works slightly differently or looks different, it immediately evokes resistance. The "vendor lock-in" is therefore not only in the contracts and code, but also in the minds of users. Breaking that habit requires leadership that looks beyond the short term and is willing to invest in retraining and acceptance.

Glimmers of hope: who dares to choose autonomy?

Is the situation hopeless? Certainly not. While the Tax Authority chooses the beaten path, other government bodies are showing that things can indeed be done differently. IO+ previously reported extensively on the steps taken by the Danish cities of Copenhagen and Aarhus. These municipalities decided to no longer accept rising license costs and privacy concerns. They have started a large-scale migration away from Microsoft, toward open-source solutions like Nextcloud. This is not an easy road, but it proves that digital sovereignty is a choice, not an impossibility.

There are also glimmers of hope in the Netherlands, showing that the technical reality is shifting. The OpenDesk initiative is a concrete example of this. This project, supported by the Central Government CIO and the Ministry of the Interior, is working on a fully open-source work environment for civil servants. In collaboration with German and French partners, they are building a sovereign workplace that aims to equal the functionality of the big tech giants, without the associated data hunger. Municipalities such as Amsterdam and the VNG (via Common Ground) are also increasingly betting on open source and transparency. These initiatives may still be in their infancy compared to the power of Big Tech, but they form the necessary seed for an autonomous future.

The need for the long haul

The NOS investigation forces us to face the facts: the Netherlands has handed over its digital keys. The indignation in politics is justified, but without concrete action, it remains just words. The case of the Tax Authority teaches us that the road to independence is not about one simple decision. It is a long-haul trajectory that requires investments in our own knowledge, European cooperation, and above all: the courage to accept discomfort.

We cannot expect European alternatives to offer exactly the same features overnight as the American giants that pump billions into their products. But the price of doing nothing - total dependence on a power that increasingly shouts "America First" - is eventually many times higher. The technical means are there; it is now mainly a matter of will and decisiveness.