Summary

The US software provider Palantir, under CEO Alex Karp, disseminates authoritarian and racist positions through its manifesto that contradict European technological sovereignty. Palantir software is already being used in German federal states (Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg) for police data analysis and is financed by German taxpayers. The EU has promoted digital sovereignty since 2020, but remains factually dependent on US infrastructure and US government access – a contradiction that also appears in supposedly European alternatives such as DeepL and Wero, which are built on Amazon Web Services (AWS).

People

Topics

  • Technological Sovereignty
  • Data Surveillance and Police State
  • US Tech Oligarchy
  • Digital Infrastructure Europe
  • Authoritarianism in Silicon Valley

Clarus Lead

European rhetoric about digital independence collides with a reality of structural dependence: Palantir and Amazon Web Services control central infrastructures on which European authorities, courts, and allegedly European services depend. When US authorities intervene – as with the freezing of ICC judges' accounts in 2024 – it becomes clear that sovereignty promises remain worthless. This insight is older than six years, yet concrete technical solutions continue to be lacking.

Detailed Summary

The Palantir Manifesto contains openly anti-democratic positions: CEO Karp questions the value of pluralism ("empty and hollow"), attacks certain cultures as "dysfunctional" and "harmful," and calls for a militarized role of the tech industry in crime prevention. These views are not personal opinions but official corporate communication – an indicator of the political power that US tech oligarchs like Karp, Peter Thiel, and Elon Musk claim.

Palantir profits directly from authoritarian policies: The Financial Times reported that Palantir and Deloitte earned over $22 billion in 2025 through contracts with US immigration agencies implementing Trump's mass deportations. In Germany, the company is simultaneously funded through police contracts with state governments led by CDU/CSU, Greens, and SPD. Federal Interior Minister Dobrindt plans nationwide expansion.

The central problem lies in infrastructure dependence: European institutions use Amazon Web Services for critical data processing. A concrete case in point is the freezing of ICC judges' accounts in 2024: Amazon, Google, and credit card companies blocked the accounts of several International Criminal Court judges in The Hague at US government pressure because they were investigating war crimes in Afghanistan. Even the daughter of one judge was sanctioned. The ICC itself works with AWS.

Even supposedly European alternatives – the translation tool DeepL and the payment service Wero – partly rely on AWS infrastructure. Amazon is now promoting a "European Sovereign Cloud," which is supposed to be operationally independent starting in 2026 (BSI press release, four months old). The promise remains unfulfilled: Currently, true independence from political pressure cannot be claimed as sovereignty.

Key Statements

  • Authority Instead of Concealment: US tech oligarchs openly share their political ambitions and militaristic worldviews – not hidden, but through official corporate channels.

  • German Authorities Finance Palantir: Four federal states pay for police software from a company whose CEO spreads anti-democratic positions.

  • Infrastructure Control = Data Control: US authorities can access European data at any time if it is stored on US cloud services – regardless of sovereignty promises.

  • Six Years Without Progress: The EU recognized the sovereignty problem in 2020 but has failed to create a functioning European infrastructure alternative.

Further Reports

No further reports in the article.

Critical Questions

  1. Data Quality: What concrete security measures did the federal states of Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Bavaria review before procuring Palantir services? Are independent security audits available?

  2. Conflicts of Interest: To what extent are the government coalitions in these federal states (Union, Greens, SPD) intertwined with Palantir or other US tech corporations, or do they receive campaign financing from US investors?

  3. Causality: Is the dependence on AWS truly technically unavoidable, or would European cloud alternatives be economically viable but not prioritized for cost-saving reasons?

  4. Implementation Risk: How realistic is Amazon's "European Sovereign Cloud" promise (2026) if previous sovereignty commitments such as Microsoft's have remained non-binding?

  5. Regulation: Why has the EU under von der Leyen not enforced mandatory data residency laws for critical infrastructure (police, courts, healthcare)?

  6. Geopolitical Coercion: How frequently have US authorities blocked European data or services apart from the ICC case, and is there official documentation?

Bibliography

Primary Source: Technological Independence: How the EU Can Never Truly Be Sovereign – Der Spiegel, 26.04.2026

Supplementary References in Text:

  1. Quinn Slobodian / Ben Tarnoff: "Muskism" (current book)
  2. Hannah Pilarczyk: SPIEGEL editorial on the Palantir Manifesto
  3. Francesca Bria / Colleague: "The Authoritarian Stack" (research project, University College London)
  4. Financial Times: Report on Palantir/Deloitte contracts with US immigration agencies, January 2025
  5. Federal Office for Information Security (BSI): Press release on Amazon "European Sovereign Cloud"

Verification Status: ✓ 26.04.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial Responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-Check: 26.04.2026