Spain has instructed state-linked strategic companies to stop signing contracts with Palantir. El Confidencial reported that Moncloa conveyed informal instructions to companies controlled by the Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (SEPI), including Telefonica, Indra, and Navantia, to avoid new Palantir contracts over fears about the use of sensitive information linked to national security. El Salto reports the veto has already killed a Navantia agreement and a Guardia Civil collaboration, and that the 2023 Defense contract has been linked, though never officially confirmed, to migration control on the southern border in the Canaries, Ceuta, and Melilla.

Spain’s Ministry of Defense had previously awarded Palantir a €16.5 million contract in October 2023 for intelligence fusion and analysis within the Armed Forces Intelligence System, through a negotiated procedure without public tender. That may be on the rocks too, once the military reads the increasingly obvious Nazi roots, manifesto and mission of Palantir.

The instruction is not a formal public order. It was conveyed informally to environments of companies with state participation. This is how sovereign technology policy now works in practice: quiet directives to procurement offices, not legislation. And so what we’re watching now is a clear pattern.

Spain joins an accelerating European withdrawal from Palantir that has gathered force across the first half of 2026.

France made the most decisive and bold move on June 16, when Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu announced that the DGSI, France’s domestic intelligence agency, would replace Palantir with French firm ChapsVision. The DGSI had used Palantir’s Gotham platform since the 2015 Paris attacks and had renewed its contract just six months earlier, in December 2025. Lecornu cited the impossibility of relying on partners “capable of turning off the tap on access,” pointing directly to Washington’s restriction of non-US access to Anthropic’s Fable AI model as proof that dependence on American platforms was an unacceptable strategic risk. But we also know that as long-time users of Palantir, they weren’t happy with its lack of capability and inability to perform.

Anyone watching Palantir lead America into a fool’s trap with Iran, rapidly exhausting munitions, leaving intelligence damaged and destroyed, giving Iran the upper hand… isn’t going to be wanting Thiel technology anywhere close to their military planning. It may be good at genocide, but it’s not for winning battles let alone wars.

Germany moved on two fronts. The BfV, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, chose ChapsVision over Palantir in May. The Bundeswehr separately excluded Palantir from its military cloud procurement entirely. Vice Admiral Thomas Daum, head of the Cyber and Information Domain Service, told Handelsblatt it was “simply inconceivable at the moment to grant industry staff access to the national database.” Three European alternatives are being evaluated for the military contract: Almato (Stuttgart), Orcrist (Berlin), and ChapsVision (Paris). Palantir also has been caught in Germany trying to enable extremist far-right violent mobs, reportedly infiltrating through state police contracts inexplicably leaking private data.

To put it another way, Palantir pushed into historically extreme-right police departments (Hesse), which leaked data for political purposes, while Palantir insisted a leak is “technically impossible”. Personal details of politicians and prominent immigrants were taken from police records and fed to the neo-Nazi network behind the NSU 2.0 threats. The Federal Constitutional Court struck down Palantir’s legal basis in 2023.

In the United Kingdom, the Mayor of London blocked a £50 million Metropolitan Police AI contract with Palantir in May, citing failure to demonstrate value for money and engagement with only one supplier. Palantir has responded with a pre-action letter threatening legal challenge, similar to how they forced their way into the U.S. military when they weren’t selected. Using bags of cash, loopholes and fancy lawyers to infiltrate the Pentagon. Similarly, after the Mayor’s block, Palantir announced they were able to infiltrate police and sign a deal anyway by taking over a gun registration databasre. Meanwhile, a parliamentary committee recommended the NHS use a 2027 break clause to exit its £330 million Federated Data Platform contract with the company. The British Medical Association called for a “complete break” from Palantir in the NHS, citing its work with US immigration enforcement and the Israeli military.

The Netherlands announced in June that a “fully fledged alternative” to Palantir must be available within two years, following a 2025-approved parliamentary motion to reduce dependency. Dutch politician Michelle Jagtenberg had asked the government to terminate the relationship, describing Palantir’s ideology as “racist and anti-democratic.”

The Dutch famously say the important stuff out loud.

Denmark signed a seven-year deal with Palantir for surveillance and data analytics platforms, Maven Smart System and Foundry, but has since announced it will seek local alternatives. Switzerland rejected Palantir bids at least nine times and ended its contract, concluding that the residual sovereignty risk was unacceptable regardless of the platform’s technical performance. Palantir then went after Republik, the Swiss investigative magazine that documented its seven-year courtship of Swiss authorities. It could not sue for defamation, because the reporting was true, so it invoked Switzerland’s right-of-reply law to force the magazine to publish its corporate rebuttals. Zurich’s commercial court threw out 22 of 23 claims and ordered Palantir to pay 95% of court costs plus Republik’s legal expenses. A SLAPP suit in structure, the point was never winning. It was making critical reporting expensive for a small newsroom.

Rejected nine times. That tells you how Palantir rolls. They are desperate, absolutely desperate, to infiltrate foreign governments for ideological objectives and must be stopped at the national level.

European governments are not just managing a procurement risk. They are recognizing what Palantir stands for, given the five-alarm fascism signals. CEO Alex Karp published a manifesto espousing a particular form of militant supremacy and told investors that making war crimes constitutional would be good for his business. Co-founder Peter Thiel calls himself an ACTS 17 preacher (of Nazi Lebensraum) and funds authoritarian political movements across the Atlantic while his company embeds itself inside the intelligence services of the countries those movements target. The Dutch parliament description of Palantir as “racist and anti-democratic” was not rhetorical. It was a clear and clean assessment.

Given the ideological failures of Palantir, it makes their “land and expand” strategy even more dangerous. The extraction costs are designed to rise with integration depth. Every country that fell for the trap discovers the same thing France discovered: the exit is harder the longer you delay. A company run by people who openly declare their contempt for European democratic norms is working hard to hook themselves inside the national security infrastructure of the countries those norms are supposed to protect.

Spain’s informal veto suggests Madrid examined the European precedents and decided to stop the expansion before it required an exit. That may be the smartest version of the pattern so far. The others are learning what it costs to let a fascism project disguised as an intelligence vendor into the room.

Palantir Rejection Timeline

Date	Country	Action	Outcome
Dec 2025	Switzerland	Ended contract after rejecting bids at least nine times	Sovereign alternatives; sued Republik and lost
Apr 18, 2026	—	Palantir posts 22-point manifesto on X	32m views; calls postwar disarmament of Germany an overcorrection
Apr 28, 2026	Germany	Bundeswehr excludes Palantir from military cloud	Almato, Orcrist, ChapsVision shortlisted
May 2026	Germany	BfV domestic intelligence rejects Palantir	ChapsVision ArgonOS selected
May 20, 2026	United Kingdom	London blocks £50m Met Police AI contract	Palantir threatens legal challenge
Late May 2026	United Kingdom	Parliamentary committee urges NHS exit	2027 break clause under review
Jun 5, 2026	Netherlands	Defence ministry sets exit timeline	Full alternative required within two years
Jun 16, 2026	France	DGSI drops Palantir six months after renewal	ChapsVision replaces Gotham; €655m sovereign AI fund
Jul 1, 2026	Spain	Moncloa instructs SEPI companies to stop new contracts	Telefonica, Indra, Navantia affected

Why the Acceleration

The pattern clearly has been unsteady, and compressing. Switzerland acted alone in late 2025 when it cited data sovereignty grounds. Then five countries moved in roughly ten weeks between late April and early July 2026, with June carrying three separate actions across three governments.

The real spark came on the weekend of April 18, Palantir posted a 22-point re-nazification manifesto on its X account, drawn from Karp’s book.

His antics racked up 32 million views, as he declared some cultures superior to others, called for reinstating the military draft, told Silicon Valley it owed a “moral debt” to American imperialism, and argued the postwar pacifism (denazification) of Germany was an overcorrection that should be undone.

Critics openly named him for what this was: technofascism, published without shame, by a company trying to take control inside European intelligence services.

Ten days later, the German military was the first to move. The country the manifesto instructed to shed its postwar constraints declined to hand its national database to the company issuing the instruction. That is not coincidence. Karp long had been campaigning in defense of the Elon Musk Hitler salute, and the first government to finally walk was the one he had addressed most directly with a Nazi manifesto.

The barrier to dropping Palantir is not really technical, although Palantir would tell investors they lock-in customers. It has been designed also to have a high political cost: the risk of being the government that broke with a US defense contractor and the administration behind it. Fortunately, every exit lowers that cost for the next. Once Germany’s spies chose a French alternative in May, the London block, the NHS recommendation, and the Dutch timeline stopped looking radical. They looked prudent. France then made the most pronounced break of all, throwing away the longest contract, and Spain followed two weeks later.

Adding to the mix was the June restriction of non-US access to Anthropic’s Fable model. It’s easy to see why Lecornu reached for it. A partner “capable of turning off the tap on access” described Washington, because that’s exactly what they were doing for the world to see. While the Karp manifesto had been a spark, and Fable became fuel, it was the ideology that had been the real reason to avoid or dump Palantir.

Acceleration means we’ve passed looking for invidivual national decisions. Each government watches others and finds the Palantir exit cheaper than it was a month before. That is a necessary cascade, and we hope that the next country moves faster still until no more countries are on Palantir.

The war crimes were predicted, such that prevention was deliberately removed. This combination, say experts, means Hegseth created war crimes by policy. It was Hegseth’s 2026 attempt to make America look even more brutal and worse than the My Lai massacre.

One former Pentagon official, similarly speaking on condition of anonymity, said the bombing came as a natural result of changes made by the Trump administration to reduce staff to mitigate civilian harm and Hegseth’s emphasis on lethality.

When Hegseth took charge, he slashed the size of an office called the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, created at the direction of Congress in late 2022. That stopped the office’s work on updating “no-strike lists,” which are lists of protected sites such as hospitals, schools, churches and mosques, that the Pentagon keeps, said Wes Bryant, who began working at the office in 2024 as the Branch Chief of Civil Harm Assessments. When he was working at the Pentagon, it was well known that the list was out-of-date, he said.

Protection removed, updates stopped. Children bombed. Systematically dismantling the protective infrastructure so that predictable mass casualties are highly likely is worse than a coverup.

My Lai required denial and debate. Hegseth’s version says the American military no longer is professional, because from the top level it promotes barbaric war crimes:

• Can’t miss a civilian target if you won’t even acknowledge civilians exist.
• Can’t violate protections for little girls at school if you’ve already eliminated every protection.

The heart of this story is that a man who stayed completely silent under interrogation, and yet kept a written roster of every co-conspirator in his apartment for discovery by Nazis, is an implausible narrative.

On March 27, Dutch resistance fighters, including a painter named Willem Arondeus, told the Nazis they needed to inspect a building for explosives. The Nazis welcomed Arondeus inside. The resistance then planted explosives and blew up the papers being used to hunt Jews. The Reichskommissariat Niederlande immediately offered the Dutch a 10,000 guilder bounty. Within a week, Dutch resistance had been betrayed by Nazi collaborators. Forced detention began April 1 for torture and solitary confinement Twelve were shot on July 1; two received last-minute clemency, others got prison sentences (Honig and Beck survived Dachau, Van Essen got two years in Kleve).

A story has since emerged, such as on Wikipedia, that a notebook was found in a search of Arondeus’ apartment that revealed everyone to the Nazis.

I suspect it is disinformation, and there was no notebook.

The detail traces to only the Yad Vashem Righteous Among the Nations file. And nobody else says it.

The USHMM says simply that “five days later the unit was betrayed and arrested.” No notebook.

The Stadsarchief Amsterdam, which holds the actual police reports and witness statements in its archives, says only that the Germans offered a high reward for tips and “within a week most were betrayed.” No notebook.

The Geschiedenislokaal Amsterdam repeats the same: reward offered, within a week most were betrayed. No notebook.

The VPRO documentary guide identifies the betrayer specifically: “the group was betrayed by an NSB member of the police.” No notebook.

One Dutch popular source says that despite torture, Arondeus refused to give names of resistance fighters. No notebook.

Instead we know how common and effective torture was because the Dutch public ran a human safari, where they hunted and turned people over to the Nazis for even small bounties. The system was widespread and continuous, dependant on Dutch collaboration. The Verzetsmuseum’s own 2025 commemoration speech, by Ruben Bloemgarten (nephew of executed participant Rudi Bloemgarten), quotes eyewitness testimony from Henri Gotjé and Cees Honig.

[Halberstadt] was no longer a normal person. He spoke only German to us, the tortures and emotions had made a wreck of him.

Gotjé further testified:

I could hear how they beat some of them, hung up by their hands behind their backs.

The 14 principal defendants lay for six weeks in dark cells with hands and feet bound to their beds. And critically: Gotjé was arrested late specifically “because Halberstadt despite inhuman tortures had long remained silent”, with the implication being Halberstadt eventually broke.

The Germans got the names through three mechanisms: an NSB police informant (identified in at least one source), the 10,000-guilder bounty that incentivized betrayal (documented by the Stadsarchief), and torture (documented by multiple eyewitnesses). Each person the Dutch had turned over to the Nazis could be leveraged against the next.

The notebook is an odd, unsubstantiated footnote, which serves to erase history of how the Germans got all the names without anyone having talked and without exposing the informant. It protects everyone’s reputation simultaneously, the resistance members’ honor, and the informant’s identity. Who knows why exactly this footnote was created and by who, but so far the notebook doesn’t seem to be real.