Strengthening US-EU Cooperation on Technical Standards in an Era of Strategic Competition
Transatlantic ties have had a rough go in recent months. After an unprecedented degree of alignment on Russia in the first half of 2022, including the quick and efficient rollout of a series of groundbreaking sanctions packages, the United States and Europe stepped back into dispute territory with the fallout from measures taken by Washington, notably some key provisions of the pathbreaking Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) passed last summer.
This has again strained transatlantic cooperation and affected the potential for US-EU alignment, particularly around China and technology and trade issues. Recent US actions have amplified the divide between “Atlanticists” and “strategic autonomists” and made it harder for Europe to follow in Washington’s footsteps on, for example, export controls or outbound investment screening. Even though both issues are on the table, as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen confirmed in her recent China speech, coordinated moves on these fronts could now be seen as bowing to US pressure in a context of perceived green-technology unilateralism.
Against this background, the December 2022 US-EU Trade and Technology Council (TTC) meeting can be seen as a missed opportunity. The TTC had, starting in September 2021, a productive and collaborative first year, but recently some of the most relevant transatlantic discussions have been happening outside the council’s framework. These include negotiations on IRA interpretation and carve-outs, and on export controls on semiconductor technology.
International technical standards, however, is one key aspect of transatlantic cooperation that is moving forward on a strong footing, with significant implications. Over the past 18 months of TTC work, the two sides have managed to build a solid foundation for engagement on the topic, from increased information sharing to the identification of key sectors for collaboration to fruitful collective action on recent International Telecommunications Union (ITU) leadership elections. This happened despite longstanding disagreements on ways to approach international standards development, the role of “harmonized standards”, for instance in the context of the EU’s regulatory framework for artificial intelligence (AI), and US criticism of the EU’s new standardization strategy.
Sometimes overlooked, collaboration on international technical standards is important in the current context of heightened technological competition. A highly technical workstream, international technical standards play a key role in defining future technological pathways. China’s increasing involvement in global standard setting makes transatlantic cooperation in the field crucial and increases the need for a common, strategic approach. Without careful coordination, there is a risk that the current, broad-based pushback against China could spill into the standards sphere and impede the important work of global standards organizations. There is, therefore, a need to strike a balance between strategic competition and an interest-driven approach that can ultimately uphold the benefits of collaborative global standards development.
On the heels of the G7 summit in Hiroshima, and ahead of the next TTC meeting in Sweden on May 30-31, both of which have international technical standards on their agendas, we lay out the case for why and how the United States and the EU can build on achievements in this area to maintain constructive engagement and attain concrete, ambitious results. We begin by explaining why preserving global technical standards is crucial to economic competitiveness and strategic objectives on both sides of the Atlantic (Part 2) and explore China’s increased involvement in the field (Part 3) before laying out six avenues for continued transatlantic cooperation on technical standards (Part 4).
>>> Download the article on GMF's website.
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programsFind out more
Discover all our analysesAfghanistan-Pakistan: The Overlooked War at the Margins of the Middle East Conflict
Pakistan has historically maintained the closest ties to the Taliban movement and initially viewed its return to power in Afghanistan in the summer of 2021 with considerable optimism. The bilateral relationship has since deteriorated, and the two neighbors have been caught in a cycle of escalation since last fall. In October 2025, Pakistan launched its first airstrikes on Kabul. For three weeks in February–March 2026, Afghanistan intensified ground assaults on the Pakistani side of the border as well as drone attacks on Islamabad and Rawalpindi. Pakistan, for its part, has intensified airstrikes on Afghan border areas, as well as on Kabul and Kandahar. Given the dynamics at play at the bilateral and regional levels, the prospects for a sustained return to stability appear limited.
European Union-India: Lasting Rapprochement or Partnership of Convenience?
The partnership between the European Union (EU) and India has long been limited to economic exchanges. Its political dimension has gradually developed, culminating in its elevation to the status of a “strategic partnership” in 2004. However, the failure of negotiations for a free-trade agreement in 2013 slowed this momentum. Since the early 2020s, in an uncertain geopolitical context, bilateral rapprochement has gained new momentum.
Japan’s Takaichi Landslide: A New Face of Power
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has turned her exceptional popularity into a historic political victory. The snap elections of February 8 delivered an overwhelming majority for the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), driven by strong support from young voters, drawn to her iconoclastic and dynamic image, and from conservative voters reassured by her vision of national assertiveness. This popularity lays the foundation for an ambitious strategy on both the domestic and international fronts.
The U.S. Policy Toward Taiwan Beyond Donald Trump: Mapping the American Stakeholders of U.S.-Taiwan Relations
Donald Trump’s return to the White House reintroduced acute uncertainty into the security commitment of the United States (U.S.) to Taiwan. Unlike President Joe Biden, who repeatedly stated the determination to defend Taiwan, President Trump refrains from commenting on the hypothetical U.S. response in the context of a cross-Strait crisis.