European regulators have a pattern worth examining. They craft regulations so complex that compliance becomes nearly impossible, then use enforcement as leverage. Tech companies face a choice: either quietly implement content moderation policies that align with government preferences, or face legal consequences.

The Telegram situation in France illustrates this dynamic perfectly. Authorities launched what many considered a questionable criminal probe. Shortly after, intelligence agencies reportedly approached the messaging platform with an interesting proposition—cooperate on content moderation in Romania and Moldova, and perhaps the French investigation might become less problematic.

This isn't about legitimate law enforcement. It's a playbook. Design rules that no one can fully satisfy, then offer selective enforcement relief in exchange for behind-the-scenes cooperation on speech controls. The targets aren't just any companies—they're platforms that built their reputation on resisting exactly this kind of pressure.

For those watching crypto and decentralized communication infrastructure, the implications are clear. Centralized platforms remain vulnerable to regulatory arm-twisting, regardless of their stated principles. The pressure doesn't come through transparent legal processes—it arrives through investigative threats and quiet offers from intelligence services.

The question isn't whether these tactics work in the short term. It's whether the Web3 community can build alternatives resilient enough that such pressure becomes irrelevant.