Yes, yes, but
"provides a valuable insurance system if the US-controlled GPS network ever gets shut down for any reason". Yes, yes, but it is also about having the technology, a industry capable of producing something. We don't produce aeroplanes and cars in Europe because we are affraid the USA would stop exporting them. Rather call it sound competition.
Still it's quite a political soap opera, quoting the Wikipedia.
"Since Galileo was designed to provide the highest possible precision (greater than GPS) to anyone, the US was concerned that an enemy could use Galileo signals in military strikes against the US and its allies (some weapons like missiles use GNSS systems for guidance). The frequency initially chosen for Galileo would have made it impossible for the US to block the Galileo signals without also interfering with their own GPS signals. The US did not want to lose their GNSS capability with GPS while denying enemies the use of GNSS. Some US officials became especially concerned when Chinese interest in Galileo was reported.
An anonymous EU official claimed that the US officials implied that they might consider shooting down Galileo satellites in the event of a major conflict in which Galileo was used in attacks against American forces. The EU's stance is that Galileo is a neutral technology, available to all countries and everyone. At first, EU officials did not want to change their original plans for Galileo, but have since reached a compromise, that Galileo was to use a different frequency. This allowed the blocking or jamming of either GNSS system without affecting the other (jam Galileo without affecting GPS, or jam GPS but not Galileo), giving the US a greater advantage in conflicts in which it has the electronic warfare upper hand.