The US would sooner see TSMC fabs burn than let China have them
- Reference: 1678824906
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/03/14/us_china_tsmc_taiwan/
- Source link:
“The United States and its allies are never going to let those factories fall into Chinese hands," Robert O’Brien [1]said at the Global Security Forum in Qatar this week.
In O’Brien’s mind, a successful invasion of Taiwan would reposition China as the leading semiconductor manufacturing power almost overnight. Or as he put it, China would become “the new OPEC of silicon chips.” O’Brien contends the US will destroy Taiwanese fabs to prevent China from gaining the technological advantage.
[2]
Of course, doing so would have severe consequences for the world economy. Last year the US National Security Agency [3]estimated the loss of TSMC at more than $1 trillion dollars.
[4]
[5]
The former advisor’s comments breathe new life into [6]rumors that the US would enact a scorched-earth policy to prevent sensitive semiconductor tech from falling into Chinese hands.
While the current and former president don’t align on many policy issues, both have taken a hawkish stance against the Chinese semiconductor industry during their tenures. In fact, the current administration has taken a considerably harsher stance with regard to the Middle Kingdom’s domestic semiconductor industry.
[7]
Over the past year, the US Commerce Department has taken steps to [8]control the flow of US chips, intellectual property, and manufacturing equipment to China. And more recently, the administration has — to mixed results — [9]pressured its allies in The Netherlands and Japan to follow suit.
Playing the long game
Xi Jinping has made no attempt to hide his ambition of reunifying the island nation with the mainland. While Taiwan has operated as an autonomous democracy, Chinese officials maintain the island and its people are Chinese.
But beyond Xi’s political ambitions, Taiwan is also of tremendous strategic value. The country is home to TSMC, which produces chips for the likes of AMD, Apple, Nvidia, Intel, and Qualcomm to name a few.
[10]China's government re-orgs Sci-Tech ministry to advance self-reliance push
[11]Chipmakers, you can have these billions – but Uncle Sam wants a cut of your profits
[12]US Army journal's top paper from 2021 says Taiwan should destroy TSMC if China invades
[13]China doesn't need to take Taiwan's fabs to escape US trade bans
Several Chinese companies, however, have found themselves [14]cut off from TSMC facilities as the foundry operator has been forced to comply with ever stricter export bans on US intellectual property.
Of course, this isn’t the first time someone has suggested blowing up TSMC’s fabs. In a 2021 paper, the US Army War College said Taiwan could [15]prevent an invasion by threatening to destroy its own semiconductor industry.
The argument being that the potential for war with the US over Taiwan did not pose enough of a deterrent for China. So, the authors argued that the government should make the island as inhospitable as possible — namely by destroying TSMC’s fabs.
However Taiwanese officials have [16]argued that such extreme measures aren’t warranted. Last fall Chen Ming-tong Taiwan’s director-general of the nation’s National Security Bureau, responded to these suggestions, arguing that should they fall into Chinese hands, TSMC’s fabs would be all-but worthless.
[17]
TSMC is highly reliant on a steady supply of materials and equipment from the likes of the Netherlands chip builder ASML. This fact was central to Chen’s argument, as cut off from global material supplies, intellectual property, electronic design software, and manufacturing equipment, the fabs would quickly grind to a halt.
The Register asked the White House for comment on their official policy on the matter; we’ll let you know if we hear anything back. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.semafor.com/article/03/13/2023/the-us-would-destroy-taiwans-chip-plants-if-china-invades-says-former-trump-official
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZBD8kLEH3ug9hAF4ItDtzgAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-07/taiwan-tensions-spark-new-round-of-us-war-gaming-on-risk-to-tsmc
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZBD8kLEH3ug9hAF4ItDtzgAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZBD8kLEH3ug9hAF4ItDtzgAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/03/tsmc_chairman_interview/
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZBD8kLEH3ug9hAF4ItDtzgAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/07/biden_china_chips/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/03/10/netherlands_china_chip_ban/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/03/08/chinese_self_reliance/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/28/us_chips_conditions/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/05/taiwan_should_destory_tsmc_paper/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/13/china_doesnt_need_to_take/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/21/tsmcs_ceo_us_china/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/05/taiwan_should_destory_tsmc_paper/
[16] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-12/no-need-to-blow-up-tsmc-in-china-war-taiwan-security-chief-says?srnd=technology-vp#xj4y7vzkg
[17] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZBD8kLEH3ug9hAF4ItDtzgAAABE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: In order to stop another country from destroying you ....
Sadly yes. I think it was applied for the 6000 years before as well.
Re: In order to stop another country from destroying you ....
Your skepticism would seem to be mirrored by the people who live there, who aren’t too fond of the idea. It’s a lot more palatable to, just throwing out hypothetical scenarios here, perhaps a foreign military that just happens to be there temporarily for the specific purpose of securing THAT resource.
So I can easily believe that the US would do this despite the questionable results for the locals. Then again, maybe the concept that the decision would be out of the locals’ hands would make the whole plan a better deterrent to China - there’s no point if they don’t believe we’d really do it.
Re: In order to stop another country from destroying you ....
@Cxwf I can well imagine the US wouldn't think twice of doing this for the Taiwanese or getting the Taiwanese to do it to themselves - but if the situation were reversed and the US had to do something like this to their own country - I wonder whether they'd be so quick to jump to this solution ...
It's a bit like Mutually Assured Destruction with regard to nuclear war
Isn't that their plan?
China can probably gain some info from having a functional fan to examine but it's not like they are just going to take over the next shift without support and cooperation from ASML, Cyber and all the software makers.
But if it was destroyed then you are going to have no choice but Korea for good stuff and China for most other semiconductors. So it would be like Russia invading Saudi, it's not to capture the oilfields it's to make your own supply more valuable.
Re: Isn't that their plan?
If China invaded Taiwan it would be just the impetus that the US would need to call for an invasion of China
Re: Isn't that their plan?
I am not convinced America would invade China but the signs they are being positioned for the same treatment Russia has been getting of late has been clear for years.
Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland's plans are progressing nicely. She's destabilised the Middle East, destroyed Russia, is destroying Europe, and that just leaves China.
Project for the New American Century FTW,
Re: Isn't that their plan?
>Project for the New American Century FTW,
Isn't it New Zealand's turn?
I am a Rock; I am an Islaaaaannnnnnd
This reminds me of a strategic situation I encountered as a child. A virtually-impregnable tree fortress was defended by a small number of children, opposed by a larger number of children on the ground. The ground forces lobbed mudballs up at the fortress-dwellers; the fortress-dwellers returned a few of them, but they had no independent supply of mudballs. The ground forces made no attempt to rush the fortress (climb the tree while under fire). We merely lobbed mudballs at the fortress-dwellers who poked their heads up to return our fire. The fortress-dwellers eventually surrendered.
If the PRC successfully invades Taiwan, and they capture TSMC intact, what will they do with it? My understanding is that Intel staff, at least, don't, in any major way, know how to fix or maintain the tools they use to produce their wafers. Instead, they rely on the companies which built those tools to service them. Will ASML, et. al. be trotting their techs over to a war zone to maintain and fix those machines? If I worked for ASML, I'd quit before I'd agree to go to a Taiwan which was under PRC control. I wouldn't want to be potentially questioned, detained, or worse.
Former advisor?
So he doesn't make policy nor is an official spokesman for the government. Got it.
Re: Former advisor?
So he doesn't make policy nor is an official spokesman for the government.
No, but he captured the entire essence of America's "Better dead than Red", "Rapture Ready" psyche, and what has many calling the US an arrogant, selfish, war-mongering, rogue nation, in one short sentence.
I am sure he'd also have something to say if China, or any other nation, were to suggest pulling the rug from under American feet in the same way.
But we're The Good Guys (TM) so it's okay.
Comparison to OPEC
is rather an odd one
Hint, look into Petro Dollars.
Re: Comparison to OPEC
Following should be read in the voice of Jeremy Clarkson a la Top Gear ...
"Some say Iraq was invaded not because of WMDs - because they didn't have any - but because they agreed to use the Petro Yuan" - nothing is written down anywhere (obviously) - so who knows whether it's true or not?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-considers-accepting-yuan-instead-of-dollars-for-chinese-oil-sales-11647351541
Re: Comparison to OPEC
I thought it was a well documented move towards the Petro-Euro rather than the Petro-Yuan which sealed Saddam's fate, but "piss America off and reap the rewards" would seem to cover it.
In order to stop another country from destroying you ....
... destroy what they're after first ...
Is that the best strategic thinking we've come up with after 2000+ years on this Earth?