by Rachida Roukiaoui (Policy Intern at CELI)
Semiconductors are no longer just components hidden deep inside smartphones, cars, medical devices, or satellites. They have become the nervous system of contemporary societies and, increasingly, the fault line along which economic power, technological leadership, and geopolitical influence are contested. For the European Union, the semiconductor question is not merely industrial or technological; it is profoundly political. It touches the EU’s capacity to act autonomously in a fragmented world, to protect its citizens from systemic shocks, and to remain a relevant power in an era defined by digitalization and strategic competition.
The global chip shortages that began in 2020 functioned as a moment of brutal clarity[1]. Assembly lines halted, hospitals faced procurement delays, and entire sectors; from automotive manufacturing to renewable energy were exposed as critically dependent on supply chains stretching thousands of kilometers beyond Europe’s borders. What had long been treated as an efficiency problem suddenly appeared as a vulnerability. The European Union discovered that its deep integration into global markets, once celebrated as a source of prosperity, could also translate into strategic fragility.
Against this backdrop, the EU Semiconductor Strategy, crystallized in the European Chips Act, represents more than a policy response to a temporary shortage. It embodies a deeper ambition: to reposition Europe within the global semiconductor ecosystem and to reconcile openness with resilience, market logic with strategic foresight, and national interests with collective action. This article explores the origins, logic, limits, and future prospects of the EU Semiconductor Strategy, arguing that its ultimate success will depend less on financial commitments alone than on Europe’s ability to think geopolitically, act collectively, and invest patiently in long-term capabilities.
Semiconductors and Power: From Market Commodity to Strategic Asset
For decades, semiconductors were governed by a relatively stable division of labor. Design excellence flourished in the United States, manufacturing scale concentrated in East Asia, and Europe specialized in niche segments such as advanced equipment, automotive chips, and industrial applications. This arrangement appeared efficient and mutually beneficial. Yet it rested on assumptions that are no longer valid: political stability, frictionless trade, and the absence of weaponized interdependence.
The acceleration of technological rivalry particularly between the United States and China has transformed semiconductors into instruments of power[2]. Export controls, investment screening, and technology bans have become routine tools of statecraft. In this new environment, dependence is no longer neutral; it is a potential liability. Europe’s heavy reliance on external suppliers for advanced logic chips, combined with geographic concentration in a handful of Asian foundries, has therefore acquired a strategic dimension.
Semiconductors now shape the balance of power across multiple domains: economic competitiveness, military capabilities, energy transitions, and digital sovereignty. Artificial intelligence, quantum computing, autonomous vehicles, and smart grids all depend on advanced and reliable chip supply. Control over these technologies translates into agenda-setting power and strategic leverage. For the EU, remaining a rule-maker rather than drifting into rule-taker status requires confronting this reality head-on.
Europe’s Semiconductor Paradox and the Rationale of the Chips Act
Europe occupies an ambivalent position in the global semiconductor ecosystem. Although the European Union represents only a modest share of global chip production, it holds disproportionate influence in key segments of the value chain, notably advanced manufacturing equipment, power semiconductors, automotive chips, and research infrastructures. The dominance of European firms in critical technologies such as EUV lithography underscores this hidden strategic leverage[3].
Yet this technological strength is offset by structural vulnerabilities. The EU lacks large-scale advanced foundries and remains fragmented across national production systems, while its innovation ecosystem struggles to translate research excellence into industrial scale. As a result, Europe is simultaneously indispensable and exposed able to shape global production through standards and equipment, but unable to secure supply during major disruptions.
The European Chips Act emerges as a targeted response to this imbalance. Anchored in the objective of expanding Europe’s production capacity, it combines support for research and innovation, incentives for advanced manufacturing investment, and mechanisms for supply chain monitoring and crisis preparedness. Rather than pursuing self-sufficiency, the Act reflects a strategic shift toward resilience and managed interdependence, aiming to reinforce Europe’s technological position without undermining its openness to global markets.
Strategic Autonomy Without Autarky: A European Balancing Act
One of the most delicate aspects of the EU Semiconductor Strategy is its conceptual framing. European policymakers consistently reject autarky, emphasizing that complete self-sufficiency is neither realistic nor desirable. Instead, the guiding principle is “open strategic autonomy”: the ability to act independently when necessary, while remaining integrated into global markets[4].
This balancing act is easier proclaimed than implemented. Building domestic manufacturing capacity inevitably raises questions about subsidies, competition, and international trade rules. Moreover, member states differ in their industrial structures, fiscal capacities, and strategic cultures. For some, semiconductor production is a natural extension of existing ecosystems; for others, it risks diverting resources from more immediate priorities.
The challenge, therefore, lies in ensuring that strategic autonomy does not degenerate into fragmented national strategies or subsidy races within the single market. The success of the Chips Act will depend on genuine coordination and a shared understanding of what constitutes European added value[5]. Without this, Europe risks reproducing internal divisions that weaken its collective position externally.
Geopolitics of Chips: Europe Between Washington and Beijing
Europe’s semiconductor strategy unfolds in a geopolitical environment shaped by intensifying U.S.–China rivalry. Both powers view semiconductors as critical to national security and technological supremacy, and both are deploying aggressive industrial policies. For the EU, this rivalry creates both opportunities and constraints.
On the one hand, Europe can position itself as a stabilizing actor, offering reliable partnerships and rule-based cooperation. Its regulatory power, market size, and technological niches provide leverage in global negotiations. On the other hand, Europe cannot remain insulated from external pressures. Export controls, technology restrictions, and alliance expectations increasingly force European actors to navigate complex political terrain.
The EU Semiconductor Strategy implicitly acknowledges this reality. By strengthening domestic capacity, Europe reduces its exposure to external coercion and gains greater room for maneuver. Yet autonomy does not imply neutrality. Europe’s values, alliances, and economic interdependence shape its choices. The challenge is to assert European interests without becoming merely an extension of another power’s strategy[6].
Supply Chain Resilience: From Efficiency to Robustness
A central lesson of recent crises is that hyper-efficient supply chains are not necessarily resilient. Just-in-time production, geographic concentration, and cost optimization have created fragile systems vulnerable to shocks ranging from pandemics to droughts and geopolitical conflict. The semiconductor industry epitomizes this dilemma.
Europe’s strategy therefore emphasizes resilience alongside competitiveness[7]. This involves diversification of suppliers, investment in strategic reserves, and greater transparency across the value chain. It also requires addressing less visible vulnerabilities, such as shortages of skilled labor, access to critical raw materials, and energy-intensive production processes.
Resilience is not a static condition but a dynamic capacity. It demands continuous monitoring, learning, and adaptation. In this sense, the EU Semiconductor Strategy represents a broader transformation in European economic thinking: a shift from linear optimization toward systemic risk management.
Human Capital, Innovation, and Sustainability: The Foundations of Europe’s Semiconductor Power
Europe’s semiconductor challenge extends far beyond industrial capacity or financial investment; it is rooted in human capital[8], innovation culture, and normative governance. Semiconductors are among the most knowledge-intensive products ever developed, requiring highly specialized expertise and long-term accumulation of skills[9]. While the European Union benefits from a dense network of world-class research institutions and universities, it continues to struggle to translate scientific excellence into industrial scale. Skills shortages across the semiconductor value chain, combined with demographic pressures, limited labor mobility, and global competition for talent, risk becoming a structural bottleneck that no level of subsidy alone can resolve.
At the same time, Europe’s innovation ecosystem remains constrained by risk-averse financing structures and fragmented capital markets, limiting the ability of semiconductor start-ups to scale and retain strategic assets within the EU. Without deeper reforms in education, training, labor mobility, and innovation financing, Europe risks reinforcing a pattern in which it generates ideas but external actors capture industrial value.
These structural challenges intersect with environmental and ethical imperatives that increasingly define Europe’s strategic identity. Semiconductor manufacturing is resource-intensive, creating tensions between industrial expansion and sustainability commitments[10]. The EU Semiconductor Strategy addresses this by framing environmental standards, energy-efficient chips, and cleaner production processes as sources of long-term competitiveness rather than constraints. In parallel, Europe’s emphasis on data protection, ethical AI, and responsible technology governance embeds normative considerations directly into its semiconductor ambitions[11].
Together, these dimensions reveal that European semiconductor sovereignty will not be determined solely by the number of fabrication plants built, but by the EU’s capacity to sustain an ecosystem where skills, innovation, sustainability, and values reinforce one another, transforming technological capability into durable strategic influence.
Risks, Limits, and Uncomfortable Questions
Despite its ambition and coherence, the EU Semiconductor Strategy faces significant structural constraints. The first concerns financial realism. Semiconductor manufacturing is extraordinarily capital-intensive, requiring sustained investment over long time horizons. Competing with entrenched global leaders such as TSMC, Samsung, or Intel will take decades rather than political cycles[12]. There is a genuine risk that initial momentum could dissipate before measurable returns emerge.
A second risk lies in internal fragmentation. Member states vary widely in their industrial profiles, fiscal capacities, and strategic cultures. Without effective coordination, national subsidy races could undermine the integrity of the single market and weaken collective outcomes. While the Chips Act introduces a common framework, governance and enforcement will ultimately determine whether European added value prevails over national reflexes.
Technological uncertainty adds another layer of complexity. The semiconductor industry evolves rapidly, and today’s strategic nodes may not define tomorrow’s technological frontier. Europe must therefore avoid locking itself into overly rigid conceptions of what constitutes “strategic” production. Flexibility, foresight, and continuous reassessment are essential.
Finally, there is a political risk of over-securitization. While resilience and autonomy are legitimate goals, excessive protectionism could isolate Europe and provoke retaliatory measures. The challenge lies in defending European interests without undermining the openness that has historically underpinned European prosperity and innovation.
Conclusion: Europe at the Threshold of a Semiconductor Decade
The EU Semiconductor Strategy marks a decisive shift in Europe’s relationship with technology, power, and globalization. It reflects a growing awareness that economic integration without strategic foresight can generate vulnerability rather than security. By elevating semiconductors to the status of a geopolitical priority, the European Union signals its ambition to remain an autonomous and relevant actor in an era of systemic competition.
Yet strategy alone does not guarantee success. The realization of Europe’s semiconductor ambitions will depend on sustained political commitment, genuine solidarity among member states, and the capacity to translate vision into industrial reality. It will require patience, adaptability, and a willingness to confront difficult trade-offs between efficiency, resilience, openness, and values.
Ultimately, the semiconductor question forces Europe to confront a deeper issue: what kind of power it seeks to be in the twenty-first century. A reactive power, shaped by external shocks and dependencies, or a proactive one, capable of shaping its technological and geopolitical destiny. In the microscopic architectures of chips, Europe is engraving not only circuits, but its future place in the global order.
[1] Ejdys J., Szpilko D. (2023). How to Ensure the Resilience of Semiconductor Supply Chains in the European Union. POLISH JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES
[2] Poitiers, Niclas; Weil, Pauline (2021). A new direction for the European Union’shalf-hearted semiconductor strategy, Bruegel Policy Contribution, No. 17/2021, Bruegel, Brussel
[3] Daniel S. Hamilton (2022). Strengthening semiconductor supply chains: A Transatlantic approach. Transatlantic Leadership Network & Atlantic Council
[4] Farrand, B. (2025). The Economy–Security Nexus: Risk, Strategic Autonomy and the Regulation of the Semiconductor Supply Chain. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16(1), 279–293. doi:10.1017/err.2024.63
[5] Šmejkal, V. (2024). The EU Chips Act as a challenge to power-sharing and convergence within the European Union (Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2024/III/2).
[6] Bardt, H., Röhl, K. & Rusche, C. (2022). Subsidizing Semiconductor Production for a Strategically Autonomous European Union?. The Economists’ Voice, 19(1), 37-58. https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2022-0007
[7] Glatter, R. (2025). From overdependence to independence: European policy frameworks for semiconductor supply chain resilience. IE Economics Review, 6(1). IE University.
[8] Huggins, R. Johnston, A. Munday, M. Chen Xu. (2023). Competition, open innovation, and growth challenges in the semiconductor industry: the case of Europe’s clusters. Science and Public Policy, Volume 50, Issue 3, pp 531–547
[9] Dachs, B. (2023). The European Chips Act: Objectives, funding and strategic challenges (FIW-Policy Brief No. 58). FIW – Research Centre International Economics, Vienna.
[10] Konstari, P. Valkokari, K. (2025). Green innovation ecosystems in the semiconductor industry – the role of European research and technology organisations. Sustainable Futures, Volume 10, 101127.
[11] Bria, F. (2025). Europe’s path to digital independence. In Uncertain Journeys into Digital Futures. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. pp. 19-34
[12] Yeung, H. W. C., Huang, S., & Xing, Y. (2023). From fabless to fabs everywhere? Semiconductor global value chains in transition. 132-187.
