On September 28, trade unions and civil society groups across the EU are demanding governments terminate Palantir Europe contracts, even as the data company’s chairman, Peter Thiel, argues Europe’s AI adoption reluctance deepens its economic decline.
Palantir’s Peter Thiel says sales to US businesses are accelerating and continues to describe Europe as far behind in AI. The groups see a different measure of progress, whether governments can use powerful software without giving one company too much influence over public services.
The collision itself is a testing ground for the European Union (EU) on whether it can tighten its grip on public sector oversight of foreign technology, such as that of Palantir’s, while securing a strong foothold in the global AI race.
Why the Unions Want to Terminate Palantir Europe
A coalition of trade unions and campaign groups from 30 countries and across Europe, partly coordinated by the UK’s advocacy group, Global Justice Now, signed and published an open letter calling on European governments to end existing Palantir of Europe contracts, as well as excluding the company from future deals and developing other tools. They also urged investors, including pension funds, to sell their Palantir shares.
The letter mentions Palantir’s work for US immigration authorities and the political positions of its leaders. It also argues that depending heavily on one American supplier could weaken Europe’s control over essential public systems.
“The company’s proximity to Trump’s American nationalist administration makes dependence unwise, not least because the president has shown such willingness to weaponize US economic and trade relationships,” according to the open letter.
The US-based data analytics company’s software is used by defense, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies. The demand scrutinizes European Palantir contracts because the software is used in areas where public decisions can affect people’s lives.
Palantir helps organizations analyze volumes of data, makes its products attractive to security services, health authorities, and most detrimentally, governmental defense bodies. The nature of Palantir Technologies’ software questions who really has access to sensitive records, how it shapes decisions, and whether a government could easily leave after building its work around the platform.
That warning does not establish that Palantir Europe has misused European public data. The concern is about dependence and oversight. If records, staff processes and analytical tools become closely tied to one supplier, changing providers may take time and money. Authorities may also find it harder to explain how a system reaches an output or to keep full control over future changes.
The dispute over Palantir European Union contracts, therefore, goes beyond where data is stored. Governments need to know who controls access, what the software does with information, whether its results can be checked, and how records could move to another system. Those questions matter even when an agency remains the legal owner of its data.
Where Palantir’s Already Embedded in European Governments
Palantir Europe footprint across its public institutions is quite substantial, once you dig deeper into it, with contracts spreading across different public pools.
Since at least 2016, Europol has used Palantir’s Gotham software for counter-terrorism analysis.
- Germany has also deployed Gotham-based systems at the federal level and in the state of Hesse and is currently assessing whether to extend use to additional regional states.
Denmark’s POL-INTEL predictive-policing system, operational since 2017, is also built on Gotham.
- Norway’s custom authority uses the platform to screen passengers and vehicles.
- France’s security services turned to Palantir after the 2015 Paris attacks.
- Poland has used Palantir Foundry for Government platforms since 2022, to help manage the administrative response to Ukrainian refugee arrivals.
Other European governments used its health technology during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The EU Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) purchased Palantir software in a deal reportedly worth around $17.4 million (€15 million).
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) cleared Palantir military software for use this summer. The published account identifies these examples but does not provide a complete list of every active government contract.
“Palantir is not a neutral IT service provider but a company with deep ties to US intelligence agencies and clear geopolitical interests,” said Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) lawmaker and politician, Johannes Schätzl.
For Palantir Europe, that reach is a commercial strength and a political challenge. A tool adopted to solve an urgent problem can become part of daily operations. Ending a contract then requires a workable replacement, trained staff and a safe way to transfer data without interrupting the service people depend on.
European alternatives to Palantir Must Work
Palantir’s Chairman argues that American companies are moving faster, than Palantir competitors in Europe. Speaking in Berlin, he said Palantir’s sales to US corporations had accelerated “tremendously” as businesses adopted AI.
Thiel called Europe “extremely far behind” and said its companies showed less urgency, hoping his comments add pressure to a debate in which European governments want both more capable technology and greater independence from outside suppliers.
A European alternative to Palantir is beginning to take shape, but no single provider covers every public use.
Rapporteur names Britain’s Quantexa, Ireland’s Siren and Octostar among companies seeking to compete. France’s Thales has introduced an alternative for military work, while French security services are set to replace Palantir with local company, Chapsvision.
These Palantir competitors in Europe meet different needs. A security agency searching connected records, a hospital coordinating care and a military body analyzing operations cannot necessarily buy the same replacement. Governments would have to test whether each product performs the required job, meets security rules and allows public officials to inspect its use.
The search for a Palantir of Europe also carries a risk of its own. Replacing dependence on one American company with dependence on one European company would leave many of the oversight questions unanswered. Public buyers could require open ways to move data, clear limits on access and contracts that let them change suppliers.
Several European alternatives to Palantir may offer governments more choice. But their presence alone does not prove they can take over every existing system quickly.
France’s planned move toward Chapsvision is a test of what replacement looks like in practice, from technical performance to the public authority’s ability to supervise it.
The Palantir European market question is whether European suppliers can win enough work to grow while meeting those public safeguards.
European Palantir decisions will turn on contracts and procurement rules, not only political statements. Palantir competitors Europe search to real options, but governments must judge them against specific tasks rather than national origin alone.
A European alternative to Palantir will be credible if it gives public authorities both effective tools and a clear exit route.
For Palantir Europe, the unions’ demand makes that choice immediate, but governments must explain why they use the company, what data is involved and how they will retain control if the relationship ends.
Inside Telecom provides you with an extensive list of content covering all aspects of the tech industry. Keep an eye on our Cybersecurity sections to stay informed and up-to-date with our daily articles.
