Divergent paths in digital sovereignty: a comparative analysis of EU and US regulatory and strategic frameworks

Authors

  • Dzianis A. Bukonkin Belarusian State University, 4 Niezaliezhnasci Avenue, Minsk 220030, Belarus

Keywords:

digital sovereignty, legal frameworks, global governance, data policy, geopolitical strategy

Abstract

This study compares how the EU and the US pursue digital sovereignty as a component of national digital security policy. The analysis examines the normative and legal frameworks of each actor, as well as their engagement on international platforms. It also explores the EU’s multilateralist orientation alongside the US’ alliance-building and leadership-focused paradigm. Through case studies, it identifies the challenges and risks each faces in implementing information sovereignty strategies and evaluates the diplomatic and legal ramifications of their respective approaches. The analysis also tracks shifts in US perspectives on collaboration with traditional partners. The conclusion assesses prospects for reconciling US and EU approaches within transatlantic relations.

Author Biography

  • Dzianis A. Bukonkin, Belarusian State University, 4 Niezaliezhnasci Avenue, Minsk 220030, Belarus

    competitor at the department of political science, faculty of law

References

  1. Dobner P, Loughlin M, editors. The twilight of constitutionalism? Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018. 352 p. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199585007.001.0001.
  2. Metakides G. A crucial decade for European digital sovereignty. In: Werner H, Prem E, Lee EA, Ghezzi C, editors. Perspectives on digital humanism. Berlin: Springer; 2022. p. 219–225. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86144-5.
  3. Benyusz A, Hulko G, editors. Digital sovereignty in Central & Eastern Europe. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences; 2021. 286 p.
  4. Bradford A. The Brussels effect: how the European Union rules the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020. 404 p. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190088583.001.0001.
  5. Roberts H, Cowls J, Morley J, Taddeo M, Wang V, Floridi L. Safeguarding European values with digital sovereignty: an analysis of statements and policies. Internet Policy Review. 2021;10(3):1575. DOI: 10.14763/2021.3.1575.
  6. Kavanagh C, Sheldon JB, editors. Cybersecurity sovereignty and US foreign policy. New York: National Committee on American Foreign Policy Report; 2014. 23 p.
  7. Goldsmith JL. Against cyberanarchy. University Chicago Law Review. 1998;65(4):1199–1250. DOI: 10.2307/1600262.
  8. Шевченко ЯН. Цифровой суверенитет Европы в контексте политики глобального управления данными. Политическая наука. 2021;3:251–270. DOI: 10.31249/poln/2021.03.11.
  9. Олимпиев АЮ, Стрельникова ИА. Проблемы международного права в области киберпространства и цифрового суверенитета на европейском и азиатском пространстве. Информационное общество. 2021;2:74–87.
  10. Шариков ПА, Степанова НВ. Подходы США, ЕС и России к проблеме информационной политики. Современная Европа. 2019;2:73–84.
  11. Huang MJ, Tsou YL, Lee SC. Integrating fuzzy data mining and fuzzy artificial neural networks for discovering implicit knowledge. Knowledge-based Systems. 2006;19(6):396–403. DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2006.04.003.
  12. Fahey E. The evolution of EU – US cybersecurity law and policy: on drivers of convergence. Journal of European Integration. 2024;46(7):1073–1088. DOI: 10.1080/07036337.2024.2411240.
  13. Mercer ST. The limitations of European data protection as a model for Global privacy regulation. AJIL Unbound. 2020;114:20–25. DOI: 10.1017/aju.2019.83.
  14. Steinke G. Data privacy approaches from US and EU perspectives. Telematics and Informatics. 2002:19(2)193–199. DOI: 10.1016/S0736-5853(01)00013-2.
  15. Молчанов НА, Матевосова ЕК. Информационный терроризм в международно-правовом контексте. Вестник Университета имени О. Е. Кутафина. 2018;5:94–103. DOI: 10.17803/2311-5998.2018.45.5.094-103.

Downloads

Published

2025-07-11

Issue

No. 1 (2025): Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations

Section

International Relations

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The authors who are published in this journal agree to the following:

  1. The authors retain copyright on the work and provide the journal with the right of first publication of the work on condition of license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial. 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
  2. The authors retain the right to enter into certain contractual agreements relating to the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g. post it on the institutional repository, publication in the book), with the reference to its original publication in this journal.
  3. The authors have the right to post their work on the Internet (e.g. on the institutional store or personal website) prior to and during the review process, conducted by the journal, as this may lead to a productive discussion and a large number of references to this work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)

How to Cite

Divergent paths in digital sovereignty: a comparative analysis of EU and US regulatory and strategic frameworks. (2025). Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations, 1, 26-34. https://doi.org/10.33581/2521-6848-2025-1-26-34