Across Europe, a structural shift is underway. Governments, regions and cities are actively reducing their dependency on Microsoft and other US technology giants. They are choosing open source alternatives instead. The motivation is not ideology. It is strategy.
Meanwhile, Norway once again risks falling behind.
44,000 public employees replaced Microsoft
In the German state of Schleswig Holstein, more than 44,000 public employees have migrated away from Microsoft software. Outlook, Exchange and Office are being replaced with open source alternatives such as LibreOffice and other European controlled systems.
The reported savings exceed 100 million Norwegian kroner. But the financial gain is only part of the story.
The larger objective is digital sovereignty. Control over infrastructure. Control over data. Control over long term resilience.
Germany is not alone.
Copenhagen and Aarhus are phasing out Microsoft
In Denmark, both Copenhagen and Aarhus have decided to reduce and phase out Microsoft solutions. Cost is part of the equation. But geopolitics is increasingly part of the discussion.
Concerns have been raised about political developments in the United States and how sudden policy changes could affect access to critical digital infrastructure. When major European cities openly question reliance on US cloud providers, this signals a deeper shift in thinking.
The question being asked is simple.
Should critical European public infrastructure depend on foreign corporations governed by foreign laws?
Even Norway’s minister warns about US dependency
Norway’s digitalisation and public governance minister, Karianne Oldernes Tung, has urged all state and public institutions to prepare an exit strategy in case Google and Microsoft suddenly become legally problematic in Norway.
She has explicitly warned that public institutions must be ready for major changes in how Norway relates to American IT companies.
This is not a fringe concern. It is official policy language.
Yet when I speak with Norwegian companies, the urgency often seems absent.
There is a sense that nothing dramatic will happen. That Norway will somehow be exempt. That stability will continue indefinitely.
Why?
Is Norway too comfortable to adapt?
Norway has avoided many of the structural crises that have forced rapid digital restructuring elsewhere in Europe. Our economy is strong. Our public finances are robust. We have energy security.
Comfort reduces pressure.
Has Norway’s relative stability weakened our ability to restructure quickly? Has the absence of systemic shocks reduced our willingness to question long term technological dependency?
Or is the issue competence?
Is there insufficient technical literacy at decision making level to fully understand the strategic risk of vendor lock in, foreign jurisdiction and cloud dependency?
When Microsoft is chosen by default, is it strategic or simply habitual?
AI is the next dependency risk
This issue becomes even more critical when we move into artificial intelligence.
Many organizations are rushing into Copilot, ChatGPT and other US based AI services without considering long term data exposure and jurisdictional risk.
At Norsk Interaktiv, when AI functionality is implemented in MentorKit Course Creator, the strategy is explicit. Open source language models are prioritized. Proprietary US models such as Copilot and OpenAI services are deliberately excluded in certain contexts.
Why?
Because it is fully possible to deploy open source AI models on European infrastructure. It is possible to host them on servers located inside the EU. It is possible to ensure that those servers are owned by European companies. It is possible to operate without transferring data outside European jurisdiction.
This means no automatic data routing to US providers. No hidden backchannels. No exposure to US intelligence frameworks through foreign legal regimes.
AI does not have to mean dependency.
AI can be sovereign.
It requires architectural choices.
Open Source is not ideology. It is strategic freedom.
Open source does not mean free of cost. It means freedom of choice.
Freedom to switch provider.
Freedom to audit code.
Freedom to host locally.
Freedom to control data flows.
Europe increasingly understands that technological independence is not about isolation. It is about optionality.
The ability to exit.
The ability to adapt.
The ability to remain operational even if geopolitical conditions change.
The real risk is not replacing US technology.
The real risk is building systems so deeply dependent on it that exit becomes impossible.
Europe is starting to move.
The question is whether Norway will move before circumstances force it to.
