According to EU-Startups, the drive for European tech sovereignty is now mainstream, but its definition is dangerously narrow. The piece argues that rigidly championing only startups built in and for Europe risks excluding companies with European DNA that are built for global scale from day one, like Spotify, Bolt, and Klarna. It contrasts large markets like France and Germany, where startups often serve local markets with sovereign capital, with smaller nations like Sweden and Estonia, where founders have no choice but to target a global audience immediately. The article points to Datadog, a Nasdaq-listed SaaS leader founded by French entrepreneurs with hundreds of employees still in France, as a successful hybrid model. It also notes that business model matters, citing French firm Augment, which sells online MBAs globally from Paris with a self-serve model. Ultimately, it warns that sovereignty campaigns must be matched with incentives for founders to think big globally without losing their European roots.
The Sovereignty Paradox
Here’s the thing about “tech sovereignty”: it sounds great in a policy paper. Build local champions, keep IP and talent at home, reduce dependency. Who can argue with that? But the article nails a critical tension. If you define “European” too narrowly, you might actually weaken the ecosystem you’re trying to protect. Think about it. Is a company started by Europeans who move to San Francisco for seed funding no longer European? What about a firm like Spotify, which was born in Sweden but conquered the world? If the goal is European relevance and power, shouldn’t those massive success stories count? A narrow focus on purely domestic players could end up creating a protected, but ultimately smaller and less ambitious, pond.
Geography Is Destiny (Or Is It?)
The piece makes a brilliant point about geography that’s often overlooked. For a founder in France or Germany, building for a 60+ million person market first is a totally logical, viable path. You’ve got language, culture, and often friendly regulation and capital on your side. But for a founder in Tallinn or Stockholm? The local market is tiny. Their only option from day one is to build for the world. That necessity breeds a different kind of ambition—the kind that built Skype, Spotify, and Bolt. And that’s the mindset the bigger European tech hubs could learn from. Founders in Silicon Valley aren’t thinking “market leader in California.” They’re thinking “global standard.” Why should European ambition have a smaller ceiling?
The Hybrid Path To Global Scale
This is where the analysis gets really practical. You don’t have to fully transplant your company to the U.S. to win there. The Datadog example is perfect. It’s a U.S.-listed, global market leader, yet it maintains a massive R&D and talent hub in France. That’s a win-win. Europe keeps the jobs and the intellectual spark, while the company accesses the vast U.S. capital and enterprise markets. The key is smart, staged expansion. Maybe you move one founder to New York to lead the charge, hire a killer U.S. sales leader, and build a local team. But you keep your HQ and core engineering in Europe. It’s about building a footprint, not surrendering your identity. And this is where investor choice matters massively. If your VC can’t help you make those U.S. connections, they’re not the right partner for that growth phase.
Thinking Bigger Than Borders
So what’s the takeaway? The call for sovereignty is positive, but it needs a maturity upgrade. The real goal shouldn’t be a walled garden of European tech. It should be a thriving ecosystem that produces dominant global companies that still have strong ties back home. That means policy and capital need to support both the local heroes and the global aspirants. It means celebrating the companies that scale worldwide, not penalizing them for “leaving.” Because in today’s world, if you’re not thinking globally from a very early stage, you’re already behind. The strongest form of sovereignty might not be isolation—it’s having so many influential, globally-connected companies with European roots that the world can’t ignore the continent’s impact. Now, isn’t that a better ambition?
