Democratic governance is complicated. It’s never black and white and it’s perfectly possible for parts of the EU to be working to end encryption while another part works toward enhancing citizen privacy rights. Often they’re not even supported by the same politicians, but since it’s not a winners takes all sort of thing, it can all happen simultaneously and sometimes they can even come up with some “interesting” proposals that directly interfere with each other.
That being said there is a difference between the US and the EU in regards to how these things are approached. Where the US is more likely to let private companies destroy privacy while keeping public agencies leashed it’s the opposite in Europe. Truth be told, it’s not like the US initiatives are really working since agencies like the NSA seem to blatantly ignore all laws anyway, which cause some scandals here in Europe as well. In Denmark our Secret Police isn’t allowed to spy on us without warrants, but our changing governments has had different secret agreements with the US to let the US monitor our internet traffic. Which is sort of how it is, and the scandal isn’t so much that, it’s how our Secret Police is allowed to get information about Danish citizens from the NSA without warrants, letting our secret police spy on us by getting the data they aren’t allowed to gather themselves from the NSA who are allowed to gather it.
Anyway, it’s a complicated mess, and you have so many branches of the bureaucracy and so many NGOs pulling in different directions that you can’t say that the EU is pro or anti privacy the way you want to. Because it’s both of those things and many more at the same time.
I think the only thing the EU unanimously agrees on (sort of) is to limit private companies access to citizen privacy data. Especially non-EU organisations. Which is very hard to enforce because most of the used platforms and even software isn’t European.