Digital Decoupling as an Instrument of Geoeconomic Competition: Challenges and Opportunities for Ensuring Digital Sovereignty

Abstract

The global struggle for digital sovereignty has become the main catalyst for digital decoupling, a process of technological and economic decoupling driven by the logic of geopolitics and national security rather than by the principles of economic integration.

The paper argues that digital decoupling is a consequence of the fundamental incompatibility of three leading models of digital governance: the American (market-oriented), the Chinese (state-centric), and the European (regulatory-driven). The strategies and key policy instruments of each model are analyzed in detail: the US techno-nationalism implemented through export controls and subsidies (CHIPS Act); China’s state-driven approach aimed at technological self-sufficiency (“Made in China 2025”); and the EU’s regulatory power (“Brussels effect”) based on extraterritorial legislation (GDPR, AI Act). Alternative strategies are also considered, including the Indian model of digital public infrastructure (India Stack) and South Korea’s “techno-democratic balancing”.

Digital decoupling transforms the global digital space, increasing its fragmentation (Splinternet) and turning technology into the main arena of geopolitical rivalry. For states like Ukraine, this creates a difficult dilemma between the need to attract foreign technologies to ensure sustainability and the risk of losing strategic autonomy in the future.

Special attention is paid to the analysis of the consequences of digital decoupling for Ukraine, in particular in the context of the concept of “digital lend-lease” — unprecedented technological support from international partners, which ensured the country’s digital resilience in the face of a full-scale invasion. At the same time, a strategic paradox is revealed: while saving Ukraine today, “digital lend-lease” forms a long-term dependence of its critical infrastructure on foreign technological platforms, which creates significant risks for the future digital sovereignty of the state.