Sovereignty is no longer confined to the physical borders of nations. It now extends to submarine cables, data centers, satellites, and algorithms that shape our economies and societies. Technology is profoundly redefining the very notion of power, making digital sovereignty the new geopolitical battleground. Between the need for technological diplomacy to facilitate global exchanges and the imperative of national security, states, businesses, and citizens must constantly rethink their positioning.
Digital sovereignty should not be confused with isolationism or the illusion of self-sufficiency. It is more about a nation’s ability to exercise autonomy in cyberspace: mastering its infrastructures, protecting sensitive data, and acting without external interference.
States in the Era of Techno-Diplomacy
For states, the challenge is significant and multifaceted. Traditional diplomacy is giving way to « techno-diplomacy, » where negotiations revolve as much around access to semiconductors, 5G networks, or artificial intelligence as they do around energy or raw materials. The Sino-American trade war over electronic chips perfectly illustrates this new reality: sanctions from one country can destabilize an entire global industry and isolate adversaries. Another great example reflecting this fragmentation is Internet. Built originally on a universal ideal, Internet is tending to be split into national silos and spheres of influence. This trend is evident with projects like China’s « Great Firewall, » Russia’s accelerated development of independent information systems (« RuNet »), or the disconnection of entire countries, like Iran, to suppress protestation activities.
National security now extends far beyond the physical defence of territory. Today, cyber threats are polymorphic: cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructures (healthcare, energy, finance), massive industrial espionage, and disinformation campaigns manipulating public opinion. The attack on the Corbeil-Essonnes hospital in 2022, which paralyzed the facility for weeks, demonstrates that cybersecurity has literally become a matter of life and death.
Strategic Repositioning of Stakeholders
Businesses play a key role in supporting this sovereignty. Their operations, which transcend borders, make them vectors of soft power. The possession of sensitive data (clients, patents, strategic information) exposes them to cyber risks and espionage, but also to becoming, sometimes unwittingly, main instruments of foreign policy. This is the case for tech giants (GAFAM, BATX), whose extraterritoriality destabilizes regulation, taxation, and the sovereignty of other nations.
Companies must navigate between the imperative of investing in cybersecurity, the necessary territorialization of their infrastructures (national clouds, data centers on European soil), and compliance with increasingly stringent regulations: GDPR, DSA, and DMA in Europe, the Cloud Act in the United States, data localization laws in India, etc. Those that neglect this evolution are quickly penalized by the market, judiciary risks, or citizens.
Citizens, while beneficiaries of innovation, are also the first potential victims of this technological « cold war. » Health data, digital footprints, political opinions: everything becomes traceable, exploitable, and marketable. The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed that personal data could be used to manipulate democratic debate itself. In response, citizens are asserting a new demand: the defence of their freedom, privacy, and autonomy in the digital world. Initiatives like the European digital identity or the right to data portability aim to place individuals back at the center of the system.
Finally, the scientific and academic community is emerging as an essential player. Beyond its contribution to the development of open-source tools, its role is now recognized in major texts like the AI Act, which mandates its consultation or access to data. Independent by nature, this community, though still unaccustomed to public debate, can ensure the scientific foundation of solutions aimed at strengthening state sovereignty. For example, during the 2025 summit on AI impact, it organized, with the help of Sciences Po and ENS, to inform international negotiations.
Which Path to Follow? From Resilience to Cooperation
Faced with these multiple challenges, some countries are tempted with digital protectionism. However, this approach quickly leads to isolation and a slowdown in innovation. True digital sovereignty lies in the ability to master technologies that meet its needs while building strategic alliances and participating in the development of common standards.
The European project « Gaia-X » illustrates this research for a trusted cloud, both sovereign and interoperable, capable of competing with American and Chinese giants while respecting European standards. Similarly, international cooperation to secure submarine cables or develop trustworthy AI, like the Public AI project in Switzerland, is essential to anticipate global threats. At the same time, investing in infrastructures, post-quantum cryptography, cybersecurity training, and research on system resilience is crucial to avoid dependency and ensure collective security.
Regulating Without Restricting: Balancing Innovation and Control
Technology alone cannot solve everything. Legislators must strike a balance: establish a robust framework to prevent abuses of dominant positions and technological lock-in effects, without restricting creativity and competitiveness. Regulations should prioritize interoperability, transparency, and openness to build a climate of trust conducive to innovation. On the international stage, technological diplomacy must lay the groundwork for a « constitution » of cyberspace, defining rights, duties, conflict resolution mechanisms, and potential sanctions.
France, with its tradition of political sovereignty, and the European Union are well-positioned to play the role of mediation and standard-setter. They must invest, regulate, and innovate, but also unite, as digital sovereignty cannot be built in isolation.
Conclusion: Managing Our Technological Destiny
Ultimately, digital sovereignty is a precarious but essential balance. It requires vision, anticipation, and a move beyond protectionist reactions. It demands political, economic, and civic mobilization to ensure the security of states, the prosperity of economies, the vitality of innovation, and the freedom of individuals.
The source code of applications has become a political, diplomatic, and societal issue. It is time to collectively write the rules of a sovereign, open, and resilient digital world. We have no choice but to take control of our technological destiny to guarantee peace, prosperity, and freedom in the digital age.
***
Benoit Poletti is the CEO of INCERT, an entity specialising in identity management and cryptographic solutions, offering a comprehensive ecosystem of services for the public and private sectors. This agency is involved in initiatives such as the issuance of electronic passports, the digitisation of healthcare processes and the traceability of tobacco products, while strengthening digital sovereignty and cybersecurity.
Constance de Leusse is senior advisor of the Tech and Global Affairs Innovation Hub at Sciences Po’s School of International Affairs (PSIA) and the executive director of the AI and Society Institute of at ENS-PSL.
