Europe is standing at a strategic crossroads. We can continue to regulate connectivity as if it were a narrow technical sector. Or we can finally treat it for what it is: the backbone of Europe’s economic security, industrial competitiveness and technological sovereignty. The Digital Networks Act (DNA) must be the moment Europe chooses the second path. Unless we fix key parts of the current draft law — while maintaining its objectives and spectrum measures — this will not happen.
For too long, Europe’s connectivity debate has been framed through yesterday’s questions: more obligations, more fragmentation, more sector-specific rules, more intervention in markets already struggling to generate the scale and returns needed for long-term investment. But the world around us has changed dramatically.
Europe cannot afford to be the continent that speaks the language of digital sovereignty while weakening the infrastructure on which sovereignty depends.
DNA as the European response to a global competitiveness challenge
South Korea, Japan, the United States, China and India are aligning regulation, industrial policy and capital markets to mobilize massive investment in digital infrastructure and artificial intelligence. They understand that networks are not just pipes. They are the foundations of productivity, innovation, cybersecurity, defense resilience, cloud, advanced manufacturing and the green transition.
Europe cannot afford to be the continent that speaks the language of digital sovereignty while weakening the infrastructure on which sovereignty depends.
The gap is already visible. Europe’s digital communications ecosystem represents €1.09 trillion, around 5 percent of the EU’s GDP. Telecom operators invested €64.6 billion in 2024 alone. Yet investment has declined for two consecutive years. At the current pace, more than 41 million Europeans will still lack access to fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) by 2030. Revenues per user remain below levels seen a decade ago, while Europe’s market is still split between 44 mobile operators and more than 70 large fixed operators.
This is not because European operators are not investing. On the contrary, they have some of the highest capital intensity levels in the world. The problem is structural. Europe has a fragmented market, limited scale and a regulatory framework designed for a different era. The DNA is therefore not a technical clean-up exercise. It is a competitiveness test.
If Europe gets it right, the DNA can become a true investment and innovation booster. It can simplify rules, enable scale, correct imbalances in the digital value chain and give investors the confidence needed to fund the next generation of networks. If Europe gets it wrong, it will lock itself into another decade of underinvestment, fragmentation and dependency.
Think market-driven competition and innovation, not regulation
The starting point for the DNA should be simple: regulation should make space for investment and market-driven innovation. Essentially, we need a genuine telecom omnibus. That means cutting redundant rules rather than adding new layers of complexity. It means moving toward real harmonization across the single market rather than allowing room for national gold plating. Today, the draft DNA proposal removes three reporting obligations while maintaining 17 existing ones and adding an additional 12. Co-legislators can help fix this.
On fiber, Europe should embrace a deregulatory approach, as suggested by the Draghi report. Let’s get out of the ‘regulation first’ mindset and instead embrace market-driven competition.
This means we must avoid the temptation of rigid, one-size-fits-all switch-off mandates. Fiber migration is already well underway, with FTTH coverage above 77 percent. In many countries, uptake has grown without regulatory coercion. The transition from copper to fiber should be a commercial decision, supported by best practices, deployment incentives and demand-side measures, not by uniform timelines disconnected from local realities.
The same future-oriented approach is needed for access regulation. The DNA should set out a clear path toward deregulation, with a “safety net” to address genuinely exceptional local bottlenecks. In other words: protect consumers where it matters rather than trying to shape markets by public intervention. Europe should avoid creating EU-wide access products that risk undermining the simplification agenda and regulatory certainty. Remedies, where needed, must be justified, proportionate, time-bound and clearly supportive of network deployment.
Competitiveness and consumer welfare are not opposites.
The DNA must also provide long-term certainty on spectrum. This is the one clear pro-investment measure included in the current Commission proposal. If it were to be removed, that would send extremely negative signals to those who are ready to invest in 5G and future 6G. Investment in mobile networks requires predictability. Licenses should be indefinite or long term, supported by legally secure renewal frameworks. Spectrum policy should reinforce scale and confidence, not create uncertainty.
Europe also needs Open Internet rules fit for modern networks. The principles of openness must be preserved and extended to other key digital service providers, but the rules must recognize technology shifts. Advanced 5G, cloud-native networks, quality differentiation and network slicing can support new industrial, business and consumer services. Regulation should not prevent Europeans from benefiting from the very networks Europe says it wants to build.
This is the deeper point: competitiveness and consumer welfare are not opposites. Strong, modern, resilient networks benefit citizens, businesses and society as a whole. European consumers enjoy strong protection, but it must be coherent and proportionate. Duplicative telecom-specific obligations should give way to horizontal frameworks where appropriate.
The DNA should also resist the reflex to regulate resilience through new sector-specific layers. Today’s grand resilience challenge is one of under-investment, not one of under-regulation. Security and resilience are shared objectives, already addressed through comprehensive horizontal frameworks and operational measures. Adding overlapping telecom-specific mechanisms risks creating confusion rather than protection, while failing to provide investment incentives for redundancy, backups and all other resilience measures.
Europe’s digital future will not be built by slogans. It will be built through fiber, 5G standalone, edge cloud, network virtualization, Open RAN, cybersecurity capabilities and, soon, 6G. It will be built by companies willing and able to invest at scale. It will be built only if policy finally matches ambition.
The DNA can be Europe’s connectivity reset. It can unleash innovation, strengthen sovereignty and close the competitiveness gap. But only if it is bold enough to move beyond the regulatory habits of the past. Co-legislators in the European Parliament and Council can help the Commission and industry to make this happen.