An outage at Amazon Web Services (AWS) a week ago disrupted apps and Web sites around the world, affecting more than 2,000 companies and leaving millions of users unable to access apps such as Snapchat, Roblox, Signal, Duolingo and Amazon itself. Removing the tech from our tech-dependent existence led to workers being sent home and exams delayed. The 15-hour crash underlined how deeply our digital lives depend on a small number of cloud providers — and how vulnerable many everyday systems are to a single failure.
If data is the new oil, then cloud computing is the pipeline, the refinery, the tanker fleet and, increasingly, the pump, too. The big three — AWS, Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud — account for 60 percent of global cloud computing. They own the networks and cables that move data across the world. Their platforms do not just turn data into useful insights — they do it with proprietary tools that make switching providers costly and complex. Finally, through Amazon’s Alexa, Google Workspace and Microsoft 365, they are shaping how people interact with data and services.
It is easy to forget that all the information processing has to happen in buildings full of servers connected to the Internet via fiber-optic cables. Amazon’s biggest and most critical cloud region, known as US-EAST-1, is in northern Virginia and is home to 70 percent of the world’s Internet traffic. Virginia’s role in Web traffic is comparable to the Strait of Hormuz for oil tankers — a narrow choke point through which vital commerce flows. It is vulnerable not only to technical error, but also to cyberattacks, geopolitical sabotage and terrorism. This was the cluster’s third major outage in five years, each leading to an Internet meltdown.
In a paper for University College London (UCL), Francesca Bria, Paul Timmers and Fausto Gernone warned that cloud computing is the power grid of the 21st century economy. Europe’s public services, industrial innovation and artificial intelligence ambitions are increasingly built on a digital backbone it does not own, regulate or even fully understand. In that respect, this week’s outage is no technical blip, it is a warning shot.
The authors recommended scaling up sovereign cloud infrastructure, diversifying hardware supply chains and developing open source standards. It is hard to argue that Europe and the UK do otherwise: Continuing in this vein risks the continent becoming a colony in the US’ — or China’s — digital empire. Nations are acting already. India and Brazil are prioritizing development of public digital systems to reduce reliance on foreign cloud providers. Germany and France have pushed Gaia-X, a European framework for secure cloud services. The supermarket Lidl is building its own cloud tech. Troublingly, the UK has no coherent cloud strategy, leaving its systems dominated by AWS and Microsoft.
In a debate organized by UCL this summer, Mike Bracken, who used to run the UK’s Government Digital Service, pushed back against ownership being a problem.
By adopting open standards, the UK could gain all the advantages of cloud computing without having to reinvent the wheel, he said. This risks strategic vulnerability that comes from becoming dependent on private, foreign-owned cloud giants.
Sovereignty is not just the right to choose policy. It is the power to execute it without asking for permission. True resilience means not relying on foreign servers to keep passengers flying, hospitals running, banking apps working — and government services online.
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
Taiwan Retrocession Day is observed on Oct. 25 every year. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government removed it from the list of annual holidays immediately following the first successful transition of power in 2000, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-led opposition reinstated it this year. For ideological reasons, it has been something of a political football in the democratic era. This year, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) designated yesterday as “Commemoration Day of Taiwan’s Restoration,” turning the event into a conceptual staging post for its “restoration” to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The Mainland Affairs Council on Friday criticized
The topic of increased intergenerational conflict has been making headlines in the past few months, showcasing a problem that would only grow as Taiwan approaches “super-aged society” status. A striking example of that tension erupted on the Taipei MRT late last month, when an apparently able-bodied passenger kicked a 73-year-old woman across the width of the carriage. The septuagenarian had berated and hit the young commuter with her bag for sitting in a priority seat, despite regular seats being available. A video of the incident went viral online. Altercations over the yielding of MRT seats are not common, but they are
RSS