No. There is no relevant strategy which does not answer "who is going to build it". The 11 Points are irrelevant unless you can actually create a real product a

No. There is no relevant strategy which does not answer "who is going to build it". The 11 Points are irrelevant unless you can actually create a real product and create real corporations providing these services. Point 6 "following the Airbus model", would mean a decade(s) long funding run to create a company to compete directly with US tech supremacy. This is what was (for very unclear reasons) rejected in the section before. There currently is zero actual competition with these US companies. EU companies each compete in very small niches (just like EU companies competed as suppliers for Boeing). Unless you create an actual competitor, there is no solution. The belief that you just need standards and many small, decentralized operators is what is making US Tech so dominant. They are dominant because you can go to these US companies and get most of what you need from a single source, this greatly reduces complexity overhead and the need for competent staff. Dealing with myriad of small service providers and their individual differences and compatibility issues is not effective, efficient or competitive. Europe needs an actual competitor, who can actually replace US tech companies. Insisting on the fantasy of decentralization is what is making US dominance certain.