The DNA and Cybersecurity Act captured the audience’s attention as stakeholders made their concerns clear ahead of the EC’s publication of its digital sovereignty package
Opening addresses centred around the future of the DNA, digital sovereignty and cybersecurity
On 2 June 2026, in Brussels, Connect Europe hosted its Policy Summit 2026, which focused on a variety of topical issues such as the EC’s proposals for a Digital Networks Act (DNA), a revised Cybersecurity Act (CSA2) and digital sovereignty. Introducing the event, Alessandro Gropelli (Director General, Connect Europe) called on the EC to introduce a “telecoms omnibus” alongside a more pro-investment and innovation approach to regulation. Renate Nikolay (Deputy Director General, DG CNECT, EC) followed this introduction with a DNA-centric keynote. Nikolay stressed the DNA’s importance to the future of European telecoms, and in response to Gropelli’s calls, claimed that the DNA is in itself a telecoms omnibus. However, this feeling was certainly not shared by stakeholders in the room at the 14th BEREC Stakeholder Forum in March 2026. She stressed the DNA’s role in ensuring European digital sovereignty and gave reference to the EC’s 2GHz MSS satellite spectrum framework (announced on 27 May 2026), which reserves spectrum for EU market entrants to ensure some level of sovereignty in the market. Nikolay briefly touched on the importance of cybersecurity in the telecoms supply chain, but conveniently avoided any discussion of the EC’s CSA2 proposal, which could require EU operators to rip and replace all equipment from designated high-risk vendors (HRVs) in just a 36-month timeframe.
The DNA received its routine criticisms from operators as MEPs outlined difficulties in trilogue negotiations and where the proposal may need to change
The first panel discussed the DNA, which started with Michał Kobosko (ITRE MEP, Rapporteur of the DNA, Renew Europe) explaining some of the difficulties the European Parliament has faced with the regulation. Kobosko primarily pointed to Member States’ criticisms of the DNA’s spectrum proposals, which would reduce national autonomy over auctions and licensing rules in the name of EU-level harmonisation, as a challenging area. Despite these issues, he remained ambitious about the DNA and the sector’s future. Fellow MEP, Adina-Ioana Vălean (IMCO MEP, Shadow Rapporteur of the Digital Networks Act, EPP) focused more on the DNA’s changes to (or deletion of) the Open Internet Regulation (OIR), which she referred to as an almost “biblical” set of rules. She expressed her interest in the use of network slicing and called for added clarity on it to be embedded in the DNA, rather than waiting for the anticipated publication of guidance from BEREC, which is expected to be published this month.
As expected, industry representatives were more critical of the DNA. Idoya Arteagabeitia (Chief Regulation, Public Policy and Competition Officer, Telefónica) and Wolfgang Kopf (SVP for Group Public and Regulatory Affairs, Deutsche Telekom) were well aligned on their problems with the DNA, with Kopf perhaps the most critical. He said the DNA will continue the market’s downward trend, and explained that the industry had expected it to be made up of the Draghi and Letta reports’ recommendations, but were left disappointed in its lack of ambition. Arteagabeitia was slightly less critical, saying that the regulation would change nothing, positively or negatively.
The EC’s draft merger guidelines have been well-received by stakeholders, with only minor criticisms being raised by operators
Despite the panel format of the day’s discussions, Marc Zedler (Deputy Head of the Merger Unit, DG COMP, EC) opened the conversation on the updated merger guidelines with a lengthy presentation on their key principles, leaving little time for additional contributions. Gabriel Lluch (General Counsel for Competition and Regulation, Orange) and Annamaria Mangiaracina (Partner, Linklaters) were both visibly pleased with the draft guidelines, with the latter saying that congratulations are in order for the EC for publishing the proposals in such a short timeframe. Lluch was just as positive, but still saw room for improvement, particularly on dynamic efficiencies – he argued that the current approach places too much importance on efficiencies that don’t value the long-term impacts of consolidation. The panel agreed on the importance of scale in telecoms, and praised the draft guidelines’ recognition of this.
Potential requirements for the removal of high-risk vendor equipment from EU telecoms networks came under heavy fire
The third session of the day was a fireside chat focused on the EC’s CSA2 proposal. Following Nikolay’s avoidance of the subject in her keynote, Pinar Serdengecti (Senior Policy Director, Connect Europe) was keen to get into the detail of the proposals, criticising its plan to mandate rip and replace processes for all HRV-designated equipment. She warned that the proposal risks diverting resources that could otherwise be used for investment, potentially hindering operators from meeting the EC’s Digital Decade targets. Vincent Garnier (Director General, FTTH Council) agreed, with both expressing their discontent with the EC’s "insufficient" impact assessment that came with the proposal. Oisín Herbots (Cyber Security Attaché, Permanent Representation of Ireland to the EU) was less critical, but did stress the need to avoid creating overlapping regulations. He did also admit that doing so is difficult, “like trying to make cocktails”. A muted reaction from the audience suggested those facing the significant costs of a rip and replace process may need something stronger.
Panellists from the EU Parliament and cloud industry were aligned on the criticality of digital sovereignty for the continent’s future economic growth and security
The fourth panel focused on the hot topic of digital sovereignty ahead of the EC’s now published sovereignty package, which includes its proposal for the Cloud and AI Development Act (CAIDA) and a revised Chips Act. The panel agreed on the need for EU-based alternatives in tech and the importance of public procurement leading the shift towards these. Matthias Ecke (ITRE MEP, Social Democrats) noted it is crucial that the EC does this first before mandating it elsewhere, whether that be in the wider public or private sector – although he did warn that the EC should avoid mandating procurement rules for the latter. He said customers should be able to freely choose between European and US services without being mandated to do so and without the barriers of vendor lock-in and difficult switching processes that are commonplace among the largest cloud providers. Ecke also warned that inaction on digital sovereignty risks enabling “neo-colonial dominance” from a select group of big tech firms. Mathias Nöbauer (CEO, Exoscale) and Anne Dubosch (Public Affairs and Communications Director, OVHcloud) praised the EC’s initiative on the issue so far, with Dubosch noting that five years ago, she would never have expected to see the publication of a digital sovereignty package. Similarly to some earlier discussions on the DNA, Nöbauer went back to the Draghi Report’s calls for sovereign cloud services, stating that he does “not believe the entire planet should run on two clouds”, in reference to Microsoft Azure and AWS.
