As EU Commissioner for Internal Market, Thierry Breton often portrayed himself as a champion of European sovereignty, particularly in his efforts to challenge the dominance of US corporate tech giants such as Elon Musk’s X. However, many of us suspected that his rhetoric had less to do with defending Europe’s autonomy and more to do with a desire to control the online narrative. This was evident in the implementation of the Digital Services Act (DSA), a tool that effectively grants EU elites the power to dictate what hundreds of millions of Europeans can or cannot say and read online under the guise of combatting disinformation.
These suspicions have been further validated by the announcement late this week that Breton has been approved by the European Commission — the very institution he departed only months ago — to take on a lucrative advisory role at Bank of America, the second-largest bank in the United States. In doing so, he has bypassed the customary two-year cooling-off period designed to prevent immediate lobbying. It’s a curious move for a self-styled Euro-sovereigntist: how does one reconcile championing Brussels’s independence from foreign corporate power while stepping into an influential position at one of America’s financial behemoths?
Breton’s case is not an isolated one, however, fitting a longstanding pattern in which former EU officials leverage their public service experience for high-finance positions. This generally takes place among US banks which stand to benefit from insider knowledge of European policymaking, underscoring the ongoing “revolving door” between EU officials and Wall Street.
Perhaps one of the most infamous examples is José Manuel Barroso, who served as president of the European Commission from 2004 to 2014. After his tenure, Barroso joined Goldman Sachs as an adviser and non-executive chairman, a move which drew significant backlash considering the bank’s controversial role during the eurozone debt crisis and its involvement in concealing Greece’s debt levels before the financial meltdown.
The revolving door operates in both directions, however. Mario Draghi served as vice chairman at Goldman Sachs International before becoming governor of the Bank of Italy and later president of the European Central Bank. During his tenure at Goldman Sachs, he was involved in structuring complex financial products, including those employed by Greece in the run-up to the financial crisis. Similarly, Mario Monti, the former EU commissioner who replaced Silvio Berlusconi as Italy’s technocratic prime minister in 2011, had also served as an international adviser to Goldman Sachs, resigning from the position just a few days before he was sworn in.
Besides raising ethical concerns about the blurring of lines between public service and private profit, this pattern also exemplifies the profound influence the US exerts over Europe — not only politically but in financial and economic terms as well. American financial institutions embed themselves within the highest levels of European policymaking by recruiting former and prospective high-ranking EU officials, thus shaping the continent’s economic landscape to align with their interests.
When Barroso joined Goldman Sachs, for example, his role was explicitly tied to navigating the fallout from Brexit — a crisis that could have undermined Wall Street’s access to European markets. Draghi’s role in enforcing austerity as president of the ECB also benefitted US banks, many of which were heavily indebted to European banks and governments. As for Monti, one of the first measures undertaken by his government was to pay Morgan Stanley $3.4 billion to terminate an interest rate swap struck with the US bank more than 20 years earlier.
The phenomenon extends beyond the financial sector to broader geopolitical implications. By embedding themselves in European policymaking structures, US financial institutions act as conduits for American economic and political influence. This deep integration erodes the ability of European nations to chart independent paths in addressing challenges such as digital sovereignty and industrial policy. Instead, Europe often finds itself aligning with US-centric frameworks, even at the expense of its strategic autonomy.
The timing of Breton’s move is particularly striking, as it comes amid growing debates about the role of US financial and tech influence in shaping Europe’s digital and economic landscape. Far from reinforcing European sovereignty, such actions suggest a troubling pattern of elite complicity in fostering the very dependencies they publicly decry.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWhat is this odd phrase ‘EU Sovereignty’?
What are you talking about?
The EU is not a nation. It can’t have sovereignty.
I despair of Unherd.
Please try and get the basics right.
The EU is a political alliance of countries. It is not a nation. It is not Europe. It does not and cannot represent European sovereignty. That does not exist.
Unherd is such a feeble publication I almost feel sorry for it.
Only fascist and communist states decide on what people can and cannot know, understand or say and determinedly punish transgressors by cancellation, character demolition and even imprisonment.
Can’t help thinking that our “liberal” establishments in striving to shut down inconvenient voices and, in too many cases, truths being heard by a wider audience, are finally casting off the sheepskins to reveal the globalist wolves beneath.
Mis and disinformation? Who on earth dreamed that up.
This deep integration erodes the ability of European nations to chart independent paths in addressing challenges such as digital sovereignty and industrial policy.
.
After two comments from Richard Littlewood, it is better not to touch on the concept of digital sovereignty at all
It’s like bankers rule the world or something.
Excellent piece, but the revolving door might prevent the European Commission controlling the online narrative in the EU because the US will want to shield its social media outlets (such as X) from censorship by Brussels.
This reminds me of another revolving door at the US military complex industry. The system is self-sustaining—high-ranking Pentagon officials retire into lucrative defense contractor roles, ensuring the military-industrial complex feeds itself. Rising through the ranks isn’t just about service; it’s about securing a future payday. Who cares who dies along the way?
Once in the private sector, profit takes precedence over the human cost of war. The internet is exposing what was once hidden: democracy, as we knew it, was just an ideal. People believed in it because they lacked access to the details. Now, it’s clear—what’s labeled “democratic” is just a tightly controlled system run for profit by a select few and their networks.
Many of these power players come from families with deep government ties (look into most of the real decision makers and their parents had similar jobs). Take this Breton guy—his father was a civil servant in the agency responsible for developing nuclear energy, proof of how entrenched the system is. Corruption isn’t new; it may go back millennia.
Democracy barely works at scale. It functions best in decentralized small groups that govern themselves, benefiting directly and willing to share surplus with their immediate neighbor first. But imposed from the top down? It’s just an illusion of governance, not the real thing. If people can’t see this, critical analysis has already failed.
What’s even more fascinating is that people like Bretton have become so powerful and wealthy that they simply don’t care what you little person know. To me, this is the most striking development—an open display of power and indifference. I’m trying to understand the underlying motive or the sheer confidence behind it. But I think they “believe” they got the gun and the cash! It is like the mafia but who is the ultimate boss? I am going to say Putin! Do not shoot me! The elites are rebelling Putin not you or me because we are so NPC! We gave up consent and critical minds. It is like watching a movie where you know you are the prize to play with!LOL
The EU is the most corrupt and hostile institution in the western world to the foundational concepts of the western world and to its people.
Seriously the British electorate makes the best decisions when given the chance. Leaving the EU was one of the best decisions you tea drinkers ever made.
The UK has impoverished itself in the process, meanwhile earning the hostility of the EU and losing any influence in its proceedings. Now more independent voices are being heard all over the continent – which the UK could be leading, coordinating the rise of freedom and common sense with the now achievable aim of reforming the behemoth. A chance to make history, and we blew it.
As for making the right decisions, 55% of the UK electorate now thinks Brexit was a mistake. And we also voted in a Labour government six months ago and are now rather swiftly (and obviously) regretting it.
Perhaps you should have inserted the word “sometimes” in your undeserved praise of a people who are now drinking almost more coffee than tea. Perhaps that’s the reason?
There are a few countries where you have to be careful what you say. North Korea, China, Russia, and the United Kingdom.
I’m not aware of EU ‘elites’ controlling what their citizens can say.
Why go into government if not for a chance to enrich yourself down the road? Please, no baloney about “public service.” Only the little people believe such tosh.
It is all about being or becoming very, very rich. One can be assured that some present members of the European Commission who approved this will be in time rewarded by Breton. P.J. O’Rourke summed up the answer : “Eat the Rich !