August 28, 2025, REF 2025, Roland-Garros.
A high-level panel moderated by Philippe Mabille, Editor-in-Chief of La Tribune, brought together key political and economic figures around a central issue: Europe’s digital sovereignty. At a time when 83% of the world’s data is stored with three American hyperscalers, one question arises: can we still hope for a viable European alternative in the battle over cloud infrastructure and control of strategic data? The debate, enriched by concrete examples and critical analyses, shed light on dividing lines, as well as the dynamics of convergence between public, industrial, and territorial actors.
A Geopolitics of Digital Sovereignty
From the outset, Philippe Mabille recalls American pressure: President Trump is considering taxing countries that are “too regulatory” in digital matters. A warning that reveals the divide between an expansive American model, a mimetic Chinese model, and a Europe often perceived as excessive in its regulation. The data battle thus becomes a geopolitical, strategic, and industrial issue. For some, like Clara Chappaz, “it’s no longer about choosing between dependence and independence, but about surviving economically without giving up our digital assets.”
Edenred: At the Heart of Global Data Flows
First to speak, Bertrand Dumazy, CEO of Edenred, points out that his group processes over 100 million transactions per month in 45 countries. Behind this colossal infrastructure: 700 terabytes of data, 70% stored with American hyperscalers. A forced choice, according to him, driven by three factors: global presence, depth of service catalogs, and technological attractiveness for developers.
Dumazy offers a clear-eyed assessment: American dominance in cloud computing is not the result of an imposed monopoly, but of a superior offering. In his view, “North American hyperscalers are at scale, innovative, and unavoidable.” His statement resonates as a strategic admission: if France wants to exist in the cloud space, it must create credible alternatives. And fast.
For Edenred to consider migrating to European solutions, Dumazy identifies three conditions:
- A global presence to ensure operational continuity.
- Functional richness equivalent to American hyperscalers.
- Large-scale adoption capacity by developers.
Sovereignty therefore cannot be decreed solely through regulation. It must also attract through performance and competitiveness.
OVHcloud: An Emerging European Model
Octave Klaba, founder of OVHcloud, embodies this European ambition. Present in several countries and listed on the stock exchange since 2021, his company is investing heavily in sovereign offerings, with 300 million euros per year, reaching 1 billion as soon as revenue doubles. He reminds us that “15 to 20% of data legally cannot be stored outside the EU.” This segment represents a potential of several tens of billions of euros. Provided that corporate clients make this choice.
Sens/Thales: The Sovereign Hybrid Alternative
Cyprien Falque, CEO of Sens (a Thales subsidiary), presents another path. That of a partnership between Thales and Google Cloud to offer a sovereign solution integrating the advanced services of an American player, while meeting the criteria of the SecNumCloud label. This technological and legal hybridization aims to reconcile functional richness with data protection. Sens hopes to obtain ANSSI certification before the end of the third quarter of 2025. The challenge is substantial, but the promise is strong: to create an equivalent European offering without giving up innovation.
The Structural Role of the State and Investment
Clara Chappaz, Minister Delegate for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Affairs, spoke to connect these issues to budget policy. According to her, “digital sovereignty depends on our ability to invest despite budget constraints.” She insists that every euro invested must serve a coherent industrial strategy: sovereignty, innovation, employment. She also recalls that Europe is the most structured continent in terms of data, with centralized health systems, historic industries, and highly skilled engineers.
Clara Chappaz does not minimize the challenges: public debt, administrative slowness, fragmentation of the European market. But she advocates assertive voluntarism. “We don’t have to be ashamed in the face of the 500 billion announced by Trump. In France, 109 billion euros have already been committed to AI and sovereign cloud projects.” She calls for a change in perspective: “Let’s value our strengths instead of absorbing the rhetoric of American dominance.” An offensive stance that contrasts with the resignation often heard in European debates.
The Hauts-de-France Example: Xavier Bertrand and the Data Center Valley
Xavier Bertrand, President of the Hauts-de-France Region, brings a territorial vision of digital sovereignty. He wants to transform his region into a “data center valley,” after having done so for logistics and batteries. With decarbonized energy (Gravelines power plant), available land, and a proactive policy, he wants to attract investors. For him, “sovereignty is also built at the regional level, through concrete infrastructure.”
European Regulation: Between Ambition and Constraint
All speakers converge on one point: over-regulation handicaps European competitiveness. Dumazy speaks of a “chain of hassles” linked to GDPR and the AI Act. Clara Chappaz nuances this by recalling that simplification efforts are underway (e.g., CSRD, DMA). But the essential remains to be done: unify the European digital market, simplify standards, accelerate public procurement, and encourage private companies to favor European solutions.
An Industrial Revolution to Unlock
The sports metaphor runs throughout the debate: after losing the first set, can Europe come back? To do so, it will need to invest massively, reduce technological dependence, train developers, capitalize on sovereign players, and create an attractive ecosystem. As Octave Klaba reminds us, “building a cloud provider requires global critical mass, not just a local project.”
The Battle Has Only Just Begun
The data battle is not a simple economic rivalry. It engages our capacity to control the technological levers of tomorrow, to protect our citizens, to build a data economy aligned with our values. While the United States has a lead, Europe has structural assets: engineering, fair regulation, human capital, energy attractiveness.
The question is no longer just “who will win?” but “do we really want to play?” And according to the speakers, awareness is underway. What remains is to translate this lucidity into concrete and collective decisions.
