WEBVTT - Anu Bradford Talks 'The Brussels Effect'

0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:08.600
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. So, Professor and a

0:00:08.640 --> 0:00:11.879
<v Speaker 1>Bradfred from Columbia Law School, it's been fourteen years since

0:00:11.920 --> 0:00:14.640
<v Speaker 1>you coined that term, the Brussels Effect to describe the

0:00:14.680 --> 0:00:18.120
<v Speaker 1>e's global regulatory influence. If you could take us back

0:00:18.160 --> 0:00:21.119
<v Speaker 1>to that point, what is it about the EU's global

0:00:21.320 --> 0:00:24.520
<v Speaker 1>regulatory power that you were trying to encapsulate with that term.

0:00:25.280 --> 0:00:28.360
<v Speaker 2>You know, Stephen, it was a very different world that

0:00:28.480 --> 0:00:30.960
<v Speaker 2>the EU was living in, and it was the moment

0:00:31.040 --> 0:00:35.440
<v Speaker 2>when the EU was extremely ambitious about building the regulations

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:40.400
<v Speaker 2>that we're advancing, its value around sustainability, around digital rights,

0:00:40.440 --> 0:00:44.680
<v Speaker 2>and also interested in making sure that those rights are

0:00:44.760 --> 0:00:48.800
<v Speaker 2>respected by foreign companies, and that then gave the EO

0:00:48.960 --> 0:00:53.640
<v Speaker 2>this tremendous global unilateral regulatory power. But it was also

0:00:54.440 --> 0:00:58.880
<v Speaker 2>the world in which other dimensions of power we're relatively

0:00:59.120 --> 0:01:01.680
<v Speaker 2>not that more important as they are today. We didn't

0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:06.120
<v Speaker 2>need to worry as much about the European military power.

0:01:06.600 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 2>And there was a particular aspect where the EU really

0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:12.360
<v Speaker 2>felt that it had influence. It had the influence to

0:01:12.440 --> 0:01:16.880
<v Speaker 2>shape what products were produced and consumed, and that gave

0:01:16.959 --> 0:01:20.440
<v Speaker 2>the EU certain, I would say, a power that had

0:01:20.480 --> 0:01:25.600
<v Speaker 2>been not fully appreciated in the conversations about global influence.

0:01:26.160 --> 0:01:29.279
<v Speaker 1>Where are we then, fourteen years on, has that power

0:01:29.360 --> 0:01:30.759
<v Speaker 1>that influence diminished?

0:01:31.800 --> 0:01:33.640
<v Speaker 2>I think it's fair to say that we are no

0:01:33.720 --> 0:01:37.680
<v Speaker 2>longer the heyday of the Brussels Effect or regulation. I

0:01:37.720 --> 0:01:42.480
<v Speaker 2>don't think it has entirely disappeared by any means. But

0:01:42.560 --> 0:01:45.080
<v Speaker 2>at the same time, I would say that the EU's

0:01:45.240 --> 0:01:52.040
<v Speaker 2>regulatory agenda faces tremendous challenges, both external and internal. We

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:54.520
<v Speaker 2>could not have imagined at the time that we would

0:01:54.520 --> 0:01:58.640
<v Speaker 2>be having a Trump administration where the US is very

0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:04.520
<v Speaker 2>aggressively at haacking Europe's regulatory sovereignty, basically forcing the EO

0:02:04.760 --> 0:02:08.959
<v Speaker 2>to diminish some of those regulatory ambitions. And also then

0:02:09.040 --> 0:02:12.920
<v Speaker 2>the internal pushback that is coming now from companies that

0:02:13.040 --> 0:02:15.440
<v Speaker 2>is causing now the EO to some extent lose its

0:02:15.480 --> 0:02:18.880
<v Speaker 2>own confidence in its regulatory agenda. When we are so

0:02:18.919 --> 0:02:23.280
<v Speaker 2>worried about the EU's competitiveness, the use technological sovereignty, and

0:02:23.360 --> 0:02:25.560
<v Speaker 2>there seems to be now a narrative that may be

0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:30.400
<v Speaker 2>this commitment to regulations like digital regulation is standing in

0:02:30.440 --> 0:02:32.560
<v Speaker 2>the way of achieving those goals.

0:02:32.919 --> 0:02:35.519
<v Speaker 1>Well, let's talk about about that criticism. Then, I mean,

0:02:35.560 --> 0:02:39.000
<v Speaker 1>how much of it is fair or legitimate that perhaps

0:02:39.080 --> 0:02:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the EU did go too far in regulation. You know

0:02:42.200 --> 0:02:46.160
<v Speaker 1>our efforts that the EU is making to simplify the regulations,

0:02:46.160 --> 0:02:48.280
<v Speaker 1>as they put us a step in the right direction.

0:02:49.360 --> 0:02:54.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, I generally would say that any responsible regulator, especially

0:02:54.320 --> 0:02:57.040
<v Speaker 2>when you are trying to regulate a fast moving space

0:02:57.120 --> 0:03:01.760
<v Speaker 2>like technology, needs to engage in regular self reflection and

0:03:01.840 --> 0:03:04.200
<v Speaker 2>assess whether we have done it the right way. And

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:08.200
<v Speaker 2>especially if you look at the number of different regulations

0:03:08.200 --> 0:03:11.240
<v Speaker 2>that have been passed in Brussels. Yes, there are probably

0:03:11.280 --> 0:03:18.000
<v Speaker 2>some redundancy inconsistencies overlaps where some simplification is in order.

0:03:18.520 --> 0:03:23.000
<v Speaker 2>So I'm not defending every provision of every rule coming

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:23.680
<v Speaker 2>out of Brussels.

0:03:23.720 --> 0:03:26.080
<v Speaker 3>I think, for instance, the GDPR.

0:03:25.840 --> 0:03:30.400
<v Speaker 2>Has been somewhat to burdens some especially for the small

0:03:30.440 --> 0:03:34.720
<v Speaker 2>and medium sized companies, and maybe inadvertently entrance the power

0:03:34.760 --> 0:03:38.400
<v Speaker 2>of the big tech who can better afford to engage

0:03:38.440 --> 0:03:43.160
<v Speaker 2>in very costly regulatory compliance. But I'm more worried Stephen,

0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:48.080
<v Speaker 2>that this conversation is now I think taking too much

0:03:48.120 --> 0:03:53.200
<v Speaker 2>of the political space and energy in Brussels, because i think,

0:03:53.520 --> 0:03:56.160
<v Speaker 2>even though I'm fully one hundred percent on board that

0:03:56.240 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 2>we need to prioritize Europe's competitiveness, We need to pry

0:04:00.120 --> 0:04:05.120
<v Speaker 2>veritize technological sovereignty. There's no security without prosperity. These are

0:04:05.120 --> 0:04:09.400
<v Speaker 2>absolutely the right goals, But deregulation or just trying to

0:04:09.480 --> 0:04:12.960
<v Speaker 2>kind of tweak the AI Act or the GDPR, they

0:04:13.040 --> 0:04:16.839
<v Speaker 2>will do collectively very little to help the EU enhance

0:04:16.880 --> 0:04:19.799
<v Speaker 2>that goal. So instead, I think we should be focusing

0:04:19.839 --> 0:04:23.440
<v Speaker 2>on what the real problems and the sources of the

0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:27.080
<v Speaker 2>so called innovation gap between the EU and the USR.

0:04:27.160 --> 0:04:29.960
<v Speaker 2>Why the EU hasn't been as successful in building those

0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:32.680
<v Speaker 2>tech companies, And I would argue with the reason is

0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 2>not ambitious digital regulation. It's the EU's failure to build

0:04:36.960 --> 0:04:40.680
<v Speaker 2>those fundamental pillars of the tech ecosystem where the US

0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:43.720
<v Speaker 2>has been much more successful, so the digital signal market,

0:04:43.880 --> 0:04:49.599
<v Speaker 2>the capital markets Union, rethinking cultural legal barriers to risk taking,

0:04:49.680 --> 0:04:54.440
<v Speaker 2>like unity bankruptcy laws that deter the entrepreneurs from pursuing

0:04:54.560 --> 0:04:58.600
<v Speaker 2>really cutting edge, risky innovations. And I think very importantly

0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:02.240
<v Speaker 2>that the EU has not being as successful as the

0:05:02.360 --> 0:05:05.880
<v Speaker 2>United States in attracting local talent to innovating Europe.

0:05:06.560 --> 0:05:08.960
<v Speaker 1>So are we looking in the wrong place then, to

0:05:09.040 --> 0:05:13.719
<v Speaker 1>try and fix this problem. Is the EU being susceptible

0:05:13.800 --> 0:05:17.120
<v Speaker 1>to the influence of the Trump administration in looking at

0:05:17.160 --> 0:05:20.680
<v Speaker 1>the criticism at regulation rather than tackling those underlying issues.

0:05:20.880 --> 0:05:23.560
<v Speaker 1>And can you do both? Can you innovate and grow

0:05:24.040 --> 0:05:26.320
<v Speaker 1>while also having strong and robust rules.

0:05:27.440 --> 0:05:28.120
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely.

0:05:28.160 --> 0:05:30.600
<v Speaker 2>I think this has been portrayed as a false choice,

0:05:30.640 --> 0:05:34.320
<v Speaker 2>that the EU either can afford to protect the digital

0:05:34.400 --> 0:05:39.280
<v Speaker 2>rights or then it will be successful in innovating, And

0:05:39.360 --> 0:05:43.000
<v Speaker 2>I think absolutely those two both are possible. So in

0:05:43.040 --> 0:05:47.560
<v Speaker 2>many ways, I think in today's volatile world, the rules

0:05:47.600 --> 0:05:51.880
<v Speaker 2>create some predictability, they create certainty, and I think it

0:05:51.920 --> 0:05:55.600
<v Speaker 2>would be very difficult to claim that if you look

0:05:55.640 --> 0:05:58.359
<v Speaker 2>at what is happening in the AI space, that it

0:05:58.400 --> 0:06:00.600
<v Speaker 2>would be optimal not to have rules. I think there

0:06:00.640 --> 0:06:05.440
<v Speaker 2>are genuine societal concerns and we need AI governance. So

0:06:05.480 --> 0:06:07.840
<v Speaker 2>in many ways, I think the Europeans sound the right

0:06:07.880 --> 0:06:10.960
<v Speaker 2>side of history. Even if you look at the conversations

0:06:11.000 --> 0:06:14.680
<v Speaker 2>in the United States today, there's a lot of resistance

0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:19.280
<v Speaker 2>now to this massive infrastructure building that data centers, the

0:06:19.400 --> 0:06:24.080
<v Speaker 2>harms of that AI does to the mental health of

0:06:24.160 --> 0:06:28.200
<v Speaker 2>the teenagers. So I think the EU should retain its

0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:32.960
<v Speaker 2>confidence that it does need to protect fundamental rights, it

0:06:33.080 --> 0:06:36.320
<v Speaker 2>needs to protect democracy, but at the same time it

0:06:36.360 --> 0:06:41.440
<v Speaker 2>should show equal ambition in then building those pillars of

0:06:41.640 --> 0:06:43.280
<v Speaker 2>an innovation ecosystem.

0:06:43.440 --> 0:06:46.039
<v Speaker 3>So I think that's that would be high recipe for

0:06:46.120 --> 0:06:46.680
<v Speaker 3>going forward.

0:06:47.600 --> 0:06:50.279
<v Speaker 1>Is there an issue with enforcement on some of these

0:06:50.360 --> 0:06:52.840
<v Speaker 1>rules as well? You know, the Digital Markets Actor is

0:06:52.920 --> 0:06:56.159
<v Speaker 1>this key piece of technology regulation the EU has. It's

0:06:56.160 --> 0:06:59.279
<v Speaker 1>faced a lot of criticism from the Trump administration as well.

0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:02.200
<v Speaker 1>The fine means being handed out under the DMA are

0:07:02.400 --> 0:07:05.680
<v Speaker 1>relatively small amounts of money five hundred million euro three

0:07:05.760 --> 0:07:09.640
<v Speaker 1>hundred million euro versus, for example, what the competition rulings

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:12.840
<v Speaker 1>used to hand out when we were seeing massive decisions

0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:17.080
<v Speaker 1>against American companies. Is there an issue Do you think too,

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:20.080
<v Speaker 1>that the rules, imperfect as they may be, are not

0:07:20.120 --> 0:07:20.880
<v Speaker 1>being enforced.

0:07:22.360 --> 0:07:25.880
<v Speaker 2>So I think the concern around enforcement dates back to

0:07:26.200 --> 0:07:29.800
<v Speaker 2>the era before the US was pushing back on those regulations.

0:07:30.640 --> 0:07:34.440
<v Speaker 2>It is one thing to have these ambitious laws in box.

0:07:34.520 --> 0:07:37.800
<v Speaker 2>It is a much harder thing to enforce them against

0:07:37.960 --> 0:07:42.040
<v Speaker 2>powerful tech companies that can afford There are robust legal

0:07:42.120 --> 0:07:46.520
<v Speaker 2>challenges those rules. But obviously now there's an additional concern

0:07:46.560 --> 0:07:51.440
<v Speaker 2>around enforcement. When the Europeans a navigating the growing pressures

0:07:51.480 --> 0:07:55.040
<v Speaker 2>from the Trump administration. I think the Europeans do not

0:07:55.280 --> 0:07:58.040
<v Speaker 2>want to be seen as capitulating. It is not a

0:07:58.160 --> 0:08:03.320
<v Speaker 2>popular politically to take that. The European politicians would say

0:08:03.320 --> 0:08:06.080
<v Speaker 2>that we led the Trump administration to write the rules

0:08:06.080 --> 0:08:08.800
<v Speaker 2>for Europe. But at the same time, I think there

0:08:08.880 --> 0:08:14.600
<v Speaker 2>is certain pragmatism that that might be characterizing how finds

0:08:14.640 --> 0:08:18.920
<v Speaker 2>are being set, how enforcement priorities need to be at

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:22.880
<v Speaker 2>least communicated so that they do not provoke the kind

0:08:22.920 --> 0:08:25.760
<v Speaker 2>of sentiment that the Europeans would be going after the

0:08:25.760 --> 0:08:29.120
<v Speaker 2>American companies. But I think it is notable that the

0:08:29.160 --> 0:08:33.720
<v Speaker 2>Trump administration has primarily attacked the DNA, the Digital Markets

0:08:33.760 --> 0:08:37.160
<v Speaker 2>Act and the DSA the Digital Services Act. Yet the

0:08:37.880 --> 0:08:42.760
<v Speaker 2>Course Simplification agenda now focuses on the GDPR and the

0:08:42.840 --> 0:08:45.880
<v Speaker 2>AI Act, which seemed to be more reflecting than the

0:08:46.040 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 2>internal pressures. I would say the conversation that change up

0:08:49.840 --> 0:08:52.880
<v Speaker 2>the drug is report on competitiveness and what would be

0:08:52.920 --> 0:08:56.760
<v Speaker 2>then the key legislators to make what would be then

0:08:56.800 --> 0:09:00.800
<v Speaker 2>the key legislations to make sure that those impediments or

0:09:00.840 --> 0:09:05.040
<v Speaker 2>at least alleged impediments for European growth exists but you know,

0:09:05.160 --> 0:09:08.520
<v Speaker 2>there is an argument that we are not necessarily seeing

0:09:08.600 --> 0:09:14.120
<v Speaker 2>as high fines when the EU is navigating between committing

0:09:14.320 --> 0:09:19.520
<v Speaker 2>to its own regulatory priorities yet maybe trying to some

0:09:19.679 --> 0:09:23.880
<v Speaker 2>extent navigate at least implicitly some of the pressures from

0:09:24.160 --> 0:09:27.960
<v Speaker 2>the Trump administration, but the enforcement is going forward.

0:09:28.559 --> 0:09:31.440
<v Speaker 1>Do you feel that they are navigating that correctly at

0:09:31.440 --> 0:09:33.360
<v Speaker 1>that point that and striking that balance.

0:09:34.000 --> 0:09:36.640
<v Speaker 3>No, I think it's really difficult to say. In many ways,

0:09:36.679 --> 0:09:37.240
<v Speaker 3>I would.

0:09:37.040 --> 0:09:41.679
<v Speaker 2>Say that the Europeans need to be very clear that

0:09:41.760 --> 0:09:46.320
<v Speaker 2>they have little to gain by capitulating to the demands

0:09:46.320 --> 0:09:50.400
<v Speaker 2>of the Trump administration because those will continue. There is

0:09:50.440 --> 0:09:53.080
<v Speaker 2>no way to buy stability. There is no way for

0:09:53.120 --> 0:09:56.480
<v Speaker 2>the Europeans to say that if we refrain from bringing

0:09:56.520 --> 0:09:59.920
<v Speaker 2>this and this case against this company, that somehow the

0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:04.040
<v Speaker 2>demands would stop. If the Europeans seem to be giving in,

0:10:04.400 --> 0:10:07.200
<v Speaker 2>then the next demand will follow the next day, or

0:10:07.240 --> 0:10:09.439
<v Speaker 2>the next week, or the next month. So I think

0:10:09.480 --> 0:10:14.040
<v Speaker 2>then you set the dynamic for Europe's regulatory agenda from

0:10:14.120 --> 0:10:18.559
<v Speaker 2>which the Europeans cannot emerge as winners. So in that sense,

0:10:18.559 --> 0:10:23.840
<v Speaker 2>I think there should be very little impetus to give

0:10:23.840 --> 0:10:26.320
<v Speaker 2>in when it comes to pressures from the Trump administration.

0:10:27.120 --> 0:10:31.880
<v Speaker 1>Can the EU in its current form compete globally with

0:10:32.120 --> 0:10:34.760
<v Speaker 1>the US on one side China on the other. This

0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:37.440
<v Speaker 1>is something that you've written another book, Digital Lampire is about.

0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:41.520
<v Speaker 2>So there are many challenges and the weaknesses that the

0:10:41.600 --> 0:10:44.920
<v Speaker 2>Europeans have. If we think about the AI race, for instance,

0:10:44.960 --> 0:10:48.880
<v Speaker 2>there are many who describe the race as being just

0:10:48.920 --> 0:10:52.600
<v Speaker 2>between the US and China. Those are the sources for

0:10:53.240 --> 0:10:56.360
<v Speaker 2>large language models. The Europeans don't have as much to

0:10:56.400 --> 0:11:00.280
<v Speaker 2>show for in terms of their own technological innovations. But

0:11:00.360 --> 0:11:02.959
<v Speaker 2>I think there are many strengths that the Europeans have.

0:11:03.360 --> 0:11:06.240
<v Speaker 2>For instance, if we think about the artificial intelligence, what

0:11:06.440 --> 0:11:11.360
<v Speaker 2>really matters is not just that we have the energy intensive,

0:11:11.440 --> 0:11:13.760
<v Speaker 2>capital intensive large language models.

0:11:14.040 --> 0:11:16.200
<v Speaker 3>What matters is how you actually make this.

0:11:16.400 --> 0:11:20.840
<v Speaker 2>AI serve the company, serve the society, what the applications are,

0:11:21.200 --> 0:11:25.480
<v Speaker 2>how AI will be adopted across the various verticals.

0:11:24.960 --> 0:11:25.760
<v Speaker 3>Of the economy.

0:11:26.080 --> 0:11:29.680
<v Speaker 2>And there's no inherent disadvantage that the Europeans have on

0:11:29.760 --> 0:11:34.520
<v Speaker 2>that very important layer of the AI supply chain. There

0:11:34.559 --> 0:11:39.200
<v Speaker 2>are also examples of European companies that are absolute key layers. Here,

0:11:39.360 --> 0:11:43.440
<v Speaker 2>the Dutch ASML in terms of the equipment in the

0:11:43.520 --> 0:11:49.880
<v Speaker 2>manufacturing layer of the supply chain's key to the semiconductors. So, yes,

0:11:49.920 --> 0:11:53.559
<v Speaker 2>there are European success stories, but yes there are many challenges.

0:11:53.640 --> 0:11:58.439
<v Speaker 2>There are technological dependencies and vulnerabilities, and I think it

0:11:58.080 --> 0:12:01.960
<v Speaker 2>is important that the Europeans are determined to try and

0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:05.320
<v Speaker 2>mitigate them as soon and as well as they can.

0:12:05.960 --> 0:12:09.800
<v Speaker 1>Are you optimistic about the future of the ease regulatory

0:12:09.840 --> 0:12:12.640
<v Speaker 1>power in this area? It's something that you've apout your

0:12:12.679 --> 0:12:14.080
<v Speaker 1>career tracking now.

0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:17.360
<v Speaker 2>In many ways, I think the Europeans are on the

0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:20.320
<v Speaker 2>right side of history. It is very difficult for me

0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:24.480
<v Speaker 2>to invasion the world that is best served by the

0:12:24.480 --> 0:12:27.600
<v Speaker 2>possession that the United States has taken, where we hand

0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:31.120
<v Speaker 2>over the governance of technology to these tech companies. They

0:12:31.160 --> 0:12:34.800
<v Speaker 2>don't serve public interests. Mark zuckerprog doesn't wake up in

0:12:34.840 --> 0:12:36.800
<v Speaker 2>the morning and ask the question what he can do

0:12:36.840 --> 0:12:40.839
<v Speaker 2>for democracy today. I think Europeans do need to assert

0:12:41.520 --> 0:12:45.520
<v Speaker 2>the democratic governance of our digital future, but at the

0:12:45.520 --> 0:12:49.720
<v Speaker 2>same time, I recognize we can't be naive about some

0:12:49.800 --> 0:12:54.160
<v Speaker 2>of the galancies. I think the geopolitical weaponization of these

0:12:54.200 --> 0:12:57.760
<v Speaker 2>technologies has made it plain for the Europeans that the

0:12:57.840 --> 0:13:03.760
<v Speaker 2>Europeans need to gradually devred both from Chinese and American technologies.

0:13:03.840 --> 0:13:07.640
<v Speaker 2>That means building alliances with other like minded middle partners.

0:13:08.040 --> 0:13:13.560
<v Speaker 2>It also means enhancing Europe's own sovereign technological capabilities. But

0:13:13.679 --> 0:13:16.440
<v Speaker 2>it will mean still for the years to come, some

0:13:16.720 --> 0:13:21.080
<v Speaker 2>degree of collaborations with the Americans to some extent with Chinese.

0:13:21.440 --> 0:13:23.760
<v Speaker 2>There is no country in the world that can be

0:13:24.200 --> 0:13:27.400
<v Speaker 2>entirely completely technologically sovereign.

0:13:27.840 --> 0:13:30.160
<v Speaker 3>That is not even available for the United States.

0:13:30.320 --> 0:13:34.080
<v Speaker 2>The United States also needs allies, even Europe more than

0:13:34.120 --> 0:13:37.760
<v Speaker 2>it often admits, and China needs other partners as well.

0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:40.360
<v Speaker 2>And I think that also means that we're not seeing

0:13:40.400 --> 0:13:44.040
<v Speaker 2>a fully decoupled global economy. And I think it's just

0:13:44.240 --> 0:13:47.160
<v Speaker 2>a terminus time for the Europeans and for the rest.

0:13:47.360 --> 0:13:48.920
<v Speaker 3>But I'm never giving up on Europe.

0:13:48.960 --> 0:13:51.760
<v Speaker 2>I think there are many great strengths that Europe has,

0:13:52.160 --> 0:13:53.920
<v Speaker 2>and now I just hope it will have the kind

0:13:53.960 --> 0:13:58.480
<v Speaker 2>of confidence and conviction in defending its own values while

0:13:58.559 --> 0:14:03.559
<v Speaker 2>being absolutely the resolute and ambitious in mitigating the kind

0:14:03.600 --> 0:14:07.920
<v Speaker 2>of deficiencies that exist in Europe's own technological supply chain.

0:14:08.200 --> 0:14:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Okay, BROADFORSDT, thank you very much.