The EC likened publication of its DNA proposals to unbottling a fine wine, although some in the telecoms industry do not appear convinced by the taste
The DNA is not the omnibus package Connect Europe had hoped for
On 27 January 2026, just days after the publication of the draft Digital Networks Act (DNA), Connect Europe and Politico co-hosted an event in Brussels to discuss the potential impact of the EC’s proposals and the bloc’s wider push for technological sovereignty amid current geopolitical tensions. Alessandro Gropelli (Director General, Connect Europe) stated that the EC’s DNA and Cybersecurity Act (CSA) proposals had “rocked the connectivity world”. While Gropelli considered that the proposal for indefinite spectrum licences (following the lead of the UK and US) represented a powerful signal and he welcomed the EC’s focus on copper retirement, overall he believed that the DNA missed a major opportunity, for example to move from ex-ante regulation to an ex-post regime for telecoms. Gropelli believed that the DNA should have been a ‘carrot’ for the industry, but was clear that it was not the “telecoms omnibus” he had hoped for, failing to remove overlaps between sector-specific regulation and horizontal rules. In his view, the CSA was also a ‘stick’, imposing new costs and burdens on operators at a time when the need for them to invest continues unabated.
While the Council is open to embracing foreign technology, the EC is focused on reducing external dependencies
Nicodemos Damianou (Deputy Minister of Research, Innovation and Digital Policy, Cyprus) – whose country assumed the presidency of the Council of the EU at the start of the year – was more optimistic, stating that the draft DNA and CSA, including their proposals relating to simplification (e.g. single passporting), centralisation and derisking supply chains, point in the right direction, leaving plenty for Member States to discuss. On the broader theme of sovereignty, Damianou stated that the priority of the Cyprus Presidency was on delivering an “autonomous union open to the world”, being location and technology agnostic while pursuing resilience and competitiveness. According to Damianou, the US remains a trustworthy partner, although Europe should continue to pursue its own digital agenda through, for instance, the DNA and CSA, as well as the forthcoming Cloud and AI Development Act. Henna Virkkunen (EVP for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, EC), however, felt that Europe was having its “independence moment”, considering that the region should not be dependent on one country – including the US – for certain critical inputs or technologies (e.g. AI, semiconductors, cybersecurity), which could be “weaponised” against it. She highlighted the manufacture of advanced chips as potentially the most important strategically, representing the foundation of other technologies and a possible precursor to sovereignty. Virkkunen was also pressed repeatedly on the EC’s response to recent incidents involving X’s AI assistant Grok, outlining the second investigation it has launched under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
The EC is not looking to use voluntary conciliation as a pretext for network usage fees
Roberto Viola (Director General, DG CNECT, EC) began the subsequent panel discussion by describing the draft DNA as being like “a very good European wine”, considering that it’s now time to “let it breathe”. He struck a pragmatic tone, recognising that stakeholders may be divided on whether the EC has gone too far or not far enough in certain areas, but urged them to recognise that the EC has sought to strike a balance. Ultimately, there will be negotiation (i.e. the trilogue phase) and “we’ll see where we land”. Manuel Kohnstamm (Senior Vice President & Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, Liberty Global) echoed many of Gropelli’ comments, considering that while the draft text has positive elements (e.g. choice of instrument, spectrum licensing, satellite authorisation), he was disappointed by the EC’s “lack of courage”, particularly in light of the Letta and Draghi reports, and expected some proposals to be watered down by the Council and Parliament. On the proposal for a voluntary conciliation mechanism for interconnection, which Viola was keen to stress does not mean “network fees by the back door”, Kohnstamm saw it as a “red herring”, stating that it would not “move the needle” for Liberty Global, which may have experienced only one dispute in its history. Marko Mišmaš (Incoming Chair 2026, BEREC and Director, AKOS) was clearly wary of saying too much on the DNA at this stage. He stated that while BEREC supported the EC’s approach to the copper switch-off, he considered that the draft indicated a shift towards a centralisation of powers to the EC and away from regulators. Emphasising that the region still exhibits strong national circumstances, he stated that BEREC will need to consider the text in detail before forming a definitive position.
