The Battle for Digital Dominance

How Washington Uses Policy to Control Global Tech

In an era where digital platforms shape public discourse, economic trends, and even geopolitical narratives, control over online spaces has become as critical as military or financial supremacy. The United States, despite its long-standing rhetoric about free markets and open competition, has been at the forefront of efforts to consolidate power over global digital platforms. From leveraging intelligence agencies to pressuring foreign competitors, Washington has made it clear: the digital world must remain under its influence.

The Washington-Big Tech Nexus

For years, American technology companies have operated in close coordination with U.S. intelligence agencies, forming a symbiotic relationship that enables both economic dominance and mass surveillance. From the Snowden revelations to Facebook’s cooperation with U.S. authorities on content moderation, the evidence is overwhelming. Big Tech is an extension of Washington’s geopolitical strategy.

Through control of the internet’s backbone infrastructure, cloud services, and social media giants, the U.S. government ensures that the global flow of information remains under its purview. When rival platforms threaten this hegemony, they are swiftly targeted, either through direct political intervention, regulatory hurdles, or economic pressure.

The TikTok Crackdown: A Case Study in Digital Monopoly

One of the most glaring examples of this strategy is the U.S. government’s handling of TikTok, the Chinese-owned short-video platform that has taken the world by storm. With over 170 million users in the U.S. alone, TikTok represents the first real challenge to American dominance in the social media space. Its success threatens not only Silicon Valley’s economic power but also Washington’s ability to control digital narratives.

In April 2024, the U.S. Congress passed a law that effectively forced TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, to divest its ownership or face a nationwide ban. The deadline for compliance was set for January 19, 2025. When the day arrived, TikTok was briefly blocked, but only for 24 hours. The following day, Donald Trump, having just returned to the White House, postponed the ban for 90 days, portraying himself as a champion of free speech and consumer choice.

However, this decision came with conditions: TikTok could only continue operating in the U.S. if at least 50% of its ownership was transferred to American investors. This ultimatum reveals the true objective—not national security, but control. Washington is not interested in banning TikTok outright; it is interested in owning it.

The Free Market Myth: How the U.S. Eliminates Competition

The U.S. government’s actions against TikTok follow a well-established pattern. Despite presenting itself as the guardian of a free and open market, Washington routinely undermines foreign tech companies that pose a competitive threat to American firms. The methods vary but follow a predictable script:

• National Security Pretext – The targeted company is accused of being a security risk, often with vague or unproven allegations. This was the case with Huawei, which was barred from accessing key U.S. markets and suppliers.
  
  Regulatory and Legal Attacks – Lawsuits and regulatory barriers are thrown at the company, making it difficult to operate. Chinese apps like WeChat and Alipay have faced such scrutiny.
  

• Economic Warfare – Sanctions and trade restrictions are imposed to cripple the company’s ability to function. Russia’s Kaspersky antivirus faced this fate when the U.S. government banned its software from federal agencies.
  

• Forced Sale or Shutdown – The final step is a takeover or bankruptcy. If the company does not sell to an American firm, it is pushed out of the market entirely.

• This aggressive strategy ensures that U.S. digital monopolies remain unchallenged and that all major platforms align with Washington’s geopolitical interests.

Controlling the Narrative: The Geopolitical Stakes of Digital Monopoly

Beyond economic interests, the U.S. crackdown on foreign tech companies serves a larger strategic goal, control over global information flows. Social media platforms are not just entertainment hubs; they are powerful tools for shaping public opinion, influencing elections, and managing international narratives.

By asserting dominance over digital platforms, Washington retains the ability to suppress dissenting voices, manipulate discourse, and steer geopolitical debates. Whether it is censoring content related to foreign conflicts, amplifying specific political movements, or collecting user data for intelligence purposes, the objectives are clear.

The Future of Digital Sovereignty

The case of TikTok is not just about one company; it is about the broader question of digital sovereignty. Should a handful of Western governments and corporations have unchecked control over the internet? Or should there be a truly decentralized, competitive ecosystem where diverse voices and businesses can thrive?

Washington’s approach makes it clear that the U.S. does not intend to relinquish its grip on digital platforms anytime soon. Whether through economic coercion, regulatory warfare, or direct intervention, the message is clear: global tech firms can only operate on America’s terms.

As governments and businesses around the world navigate this landscape, the challenge will be to create alternatives that resist monopolistic control. Otherwise, the digital future will continue to be dictated not by innovation and competition, but by the political and economic interests of Washington.