Freecloud Insights
Do you really need a Sovereign Cloud?
30 January 2026
There’s a question that’s starting to come up more often:
“Should we be using the European Sovereign Cloud instead of a normal AWS region?”
On the surface, it sounds sensible. Data sovereignty. Regulatory pressure. Headlines about US laws and cross-border access. Nobody wants to be the organisation that got this wrong.
But for most businesses, especially SMBs, this question is pointing at the wrong problem.
This isn’t an AWS feature comparison. It’s about understanding the difference between where your data lives and who ultimately controls the environment it runs in. And why buying “sovereignty” often adds cost and friction without meaningfully reducing risk.
If you’re not a government body, defence supplier, or part of critical national infrastructure, you probably already have what you need. You just might not realise it.
1. Why “sovereign cloud” is suddenly everywhere
A few years ago, hardly anyone outside the public sector mentioned “sovereign cloud”. Now it’s appearing in board conversations, procurement checklists, and RFPs.
The drivers are familiar:
- GDPR anxiety that never quite went away
- Schrems II being half-understood but widely feared
- Vendors quietly nudging the idea that geography equals safety
- A general sense that “EU-only” must be better than “global”
None of that is irrational. But it does blur some important distinctions.
2. What eu-west-2 actually gives you
eu-west-2 is AWS’s standard commercial region in London. It’s where a huge number of UK and EU workloads already run.
In practical terms, it gives you:
- Data residency in the UK, unless you move it elsewhere
- Strong encryption options at rest and in transit
- Mature identity and access controls
- Detailed logging, auditing, and monitoring
- A full AWS service catalogue
From a regulatory perspective, this is usually enough.
GDPR does not require “sovereign cloud”. It requires appropriate technical and organisational measures. Most regulators care far more about access control, auditability, and risk management than the branding of the region you choose.
When eu-west-2 is designed and governed properly, it already meets the obligations most organisations actually have.
3. What the European Sovereign Cloud really changes
The European Sovereign Cloud is not just “AWS, but more compliant”.
It’s a deliberately separate construct designed to answer one specific concern: can a non-EU government influence or compel access to this environment?
To address that, the operating model changes. The key point is not encryption. It’s control:
- A legally separate EU entity
- EU-only operational access
- EU-based staff for operations and support
- Separate governance and assurance model
This isn’t about “more security”. Those security controls already exist in standard regions. It’s about legal and political isolation.
4. The trade-offs people gloss over
Sovereignty isn’t free.
Choosing a sovereign setup usually means some combination of:
- Fewer services available (especially at the start)
- Slower access to newer capabilities
- Higher cost
- More operational friction
- More complexity to explain to auditors, partners, and customers
None of that makes it bad. It just makes it a deliberate choice. And for many organisations, it’s simply not the right lever.
5. Who genuinely needs it (and who doesn’t)
There are cases where the decision is clear:
- Government bodies with explicit EU-only operational mandates
- Defence and national security suppliers
- Critical national infrastructure
- Regulators that state, in plain language, that non-EU control is unacceptable
In these situations, the risk isn’t poor architecture. It’s jurisdiction.
But most SMBs don’t need it. Most SaaS platforms don’t need it. And most regulated organisations don’t need it either.
What they usually lack isn’t sovereignty. It’s confidence.
6. What to do instead (quick wins that actually reduce risk)
- Be clear about who can access production data, and review it regularly.
- Make encryption normal, and be deliberate about where keys are managed.
- Keep logs, retain them, and actually look at them.
- Write down ownership: who approves access, who handles incidents, who signs off changes.
- Decide what “good enough” looks like for your risk and your regulator, then build to that.
7. A simple way to decide without panic
Ask yourself three blunt questions:
- Has a regulator explicitly required EU-only operational control?
- Is legal jurisdiction the primary risk, rather than access or design?
- Are we already confident in our security and governance model?
If the answer to the first two isn’t a clear “yes”, sovereign cloud is probably the wrong lever. And if the third answer is “no”, that’s where the real work is.
Sovereign Cloud isn’t a shortcut to compliance. And it isn’t a substitute for good architecture. For most organisations, clarity beats comfort buying. Every time.