Written several weeks ago, this publication could not be more timely as the latest US National Security Strategy has injected fresh friction into the transatlantic relationship. Over the last 72 hours, EU newspapers and LinkedIn posts have painted a rather gloomy picture. But is outrage or an obsession with the next moves from Washington really our best option right now?

Europe is living through a geoeconomic turning point: interdependence is no longer treated as a peace dividend, but as a strategic vulnerability. Nowhere is that clearer than in the digital domain, where control over data centers, cloud stacks, protocols, and data flows increasingly determines power.

The European Commission is setting up one of the most consequential governance bodies under the AI Act: the AI Scientific Panel. Its 60 independent experts will serve a two-year term, advising the European AI Office (and national authorities) on GPAI models and systems. They will have an big say on how the most advanced AI technologies need to be tested or what future developments would mean for the law.

From tomorrow onwards, the EU’s rules for the most advanced AI models officially apply. This day is a pivotal moment: not just for the AI Act but for the EU’s overall AI strategy.

The AI Office has finally clarified which actors will fall under the AI Act’s rules for GPAI models – way too late – but those explanations are bringing the much-needed clarity for industry. Importantly, the GPAI rules are now officially confirmed to be in force from 2 August 2025.

Yesterday, the European Commission published the long-awaited Code of Practice for General Purpose AI (GPAI) models – a key element for implementing the AI Act. Having followed this process closely from the legislative negotiations until now, I concluded in my piece for Süddeutsche Zeitung Dossier that the Code is not a breakthrough but that it is a necessary step forward – though one with significant design flaws.

After months of preparation, my co-authors and I present a bold and values-driven strategy to restore the EU's strategic autonomy.

The AI Office has finally begun clarifying key questions around the AI Act's GPAI rules - especially who is in scope, what constitutes "placing on the market," and how one becomes a GPAI provider. A new working paper suggests sensible FLOP-based thresholds, limits burdens on downstream users, and incentivizes adherence to the Code of Practice; offering long-awaited legal certainty, though some open issues and consultation flaws remain.

My final overview of external activities is concluding 2 years of constant public engagement to bring transparency in EU policy-making.

This post lists each document that has been produced from 2015 until 2024, on the long journey to the final law.

This regular updated blog post provides you with the key dates when it comes to the implementation and enforcement of the AI Act.

This regular updated blog post provides you with all the latest documents and timelines for the currently negotiated AI Act.

This document gives you on 22 pages a comprehensive list of all obligations and tasks that the AI Act refers to Member States.

Prof Schwartmann, Prof Keber, and I have finalised our legal handbook on the EU AI Act. To be released this summer.

While Axel Voss is rocking his election campaign in Germany, I circulated his AI Act message across the EU.

Spearheading the implementation of the AI, the AI Office requires robust leadership and an innovative structure.

After two weeks of holidays in Mexico, my AI-event-tour continued with my first ever visit to Washington DC.

Find in this article Axel's speech on the adopted AI Act during the discussion with other parliamentarians and his statement after the vote.

The following steps are required to make the EU AI Act a genuine success story.

The February was dominated by the AI Act votes. In contrast to many people, I tried to introduce a more realistic view.