TSMC makes ~60% of all chips in the world. Samsung is ~15% and most of the manufacturing for the 3rd place company is also in Taiwan. Depending on what countries you think would end up getting involved in the war, something like 95% of all chip production would be at risk.
Thanks for that. I’ve learned a lot in this thread.
Hopefully there is an active task force working on this somewhere because it seems like now is a good time for a tactical re-location.
That’s what the CHIPS act if for, basically.
From the tone on this thread, it sounds like the CHIPS Act might be a day late and a dollar short.
Depends if China goes to war tomorrow or in 10 years. Heck, they might want to wait since the US incentive to defend Taiwan decreases a lot if we have domestic production.
Also, if the best time to do it was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.
I sincerely nominate you as the US Ambassador to China…
That is all true, and has been the prevailing thinking with regard to Taiwan for the entire time that Taiwan has been an independent political entity. Currently, Taiwan is well equipped to make a Chinese invasion expensive but not impossible. China has been expanding its naval capability in recent years, in particular its capability in areas close to its own shores. I will grant that it would be expensive but that is no guarantee that China be deterred. I do think that there is no clear dichotomy between a blockade and an invasion; any proper invasion would require a blockade to be successful for the reasons that you have stated. And a blockade would have a very high chance of leading to a war, also for reasons you have stated. Unless one side backs down from their longstanding stances, which does not seem likely. Eta: BOTH sides have to come to a new agreement, here.
As always: Peace takes two willing participants. War only takes one.
The deep problem in Ukraine, and the similar deep problem in Taiwan, is that the aggressor isn’t seeking treasure or tribute or even really land. They’re simply seeking to destroy a political regime. Which means that the deterrent effect of harm to their own forces, or the Pyrrhic victory of occupying a destroyed wasteland doesn’t matter. What matters is that the Ukrainian or Taiwan government ceases to exist, not that the dirt that government used to govern now belongs to the aggressor.
China is the only one who can decide they don’t need to do this ever. China is also the one who has decided, so far, that they don’t need to do it today. Mr. Xi is a man in too much of a hurry for comfort.
I do not think that is true. China does not want to own a Taiwan that is razed of all of its economic value. Many people have posted in this thread about the value of Taiwan’s semiconductor chip industry and the difficulty of rebuilding it. The problem occurs when they think they can pull it off with out triggering a catastrophe. Many wars are started with the expectation of a quick victory. ETA I think the situation in Taiwan is a complicated one, and I do agree that Xi is moving faster than former Chinese leaders. I admit my knowledge of the Chinese leadership is not very deep, but I do not think Xi engages in the sort of “blood and soil” nationalism that Putin often uses. I would be happy to be corrected
Clearly China’s first choice is complete political control of an intact Taiwan. Assume China is aware that can’t be achieved. Is China willing to take the second place prize of complete military control of a destroyed Taiwan?
As for the chip thing, if Taiwan stops manufacturing chips today it’s not a matter of the next iPhone being delayed a bit, or having to wait 4 weeks to get one, but rather no new phones being available, and a used iPhone 6 costing $1200.
I would hope that they would consider the options and wait a while. Peaceful reunification seems like the better option. As long as there is a continuation of US guarantees that it will keep up the pretense of recognizing China officially, while unofficially supporting a democratic Taiwan. So, both sides have to play this game.
Quite. Something akin to the Chinese takeover of what had been British Hong Kong is Beijing’s fondest hope. But given how they have treated Hong Kong since they’ve controlled it, and especially since Xi came to power in Beijing, Hong Kong is now Exhibit A for how disastrous a “peaceful” takeover of Taiwan would be for the Taiwanese people and, a few years later, their economy.
The Taiwanese really can’t have an honest differing of opinion about how China would treat them if they simply surrender to Chinese military bluster or vote in a government of Quislings who invite the Chinese to walk in and dominate first the government and then everything. One glance at Hong Kong tells them exactly what their own future would look like. Which glance does not seem to fill many Taiwanese with happiness.
Once the Taiwanese are unwilling to be absorbed peacefully the question is simply when does China either abandon this historically motivated aggressive possessiveness, or goes ahead and attacks.
Sounds like a large scale war is imminent then, within the next decade. Unless there is a huge switch in policy from either China or the US. Or we can try to keep going as we have, since that benefits all parties.
Any war that would destroy Taiwan would not be limited to Taiwan. Unless the US fully withdrew from its commitments, which it (probably) will not do. That would be a regional war at the very least, and China knows this. Expect involvement from Japan and Australia, and probably South Korea and others. So “second prize” is not just a ruined Taiwan.
It’s all up to Mr. Xi. He may get cold feet, he may get wise counsel urging caution, or he may get hot-headed. Or he may get deposed or drop dead of truly natural causes.
Both American and Chinese power have a certain unsustainability to them.
We can’t keep gutting our schools, increasing inequality, increasing political polarization, increasing debt, and also keep on top of the world domination game. For their part, the Chinese are facing a debt trap, an ecological trap, and a demographic trap at both ends with a vastly expanding pool of elders and a rapidly shrinking pool of young workers. They are gaining power rapidly, but it has the feel of a zoom or a bubble where although it may not burst, the burgeoning is inevitably going to flatten out real soon and real hard. For the 800 million Chinese who’ve lived only in a boom expecting more boom (net of COVID), flat is going to feel a lot like a depression.
The most dangerous time for any country is when it feels its grip on power waning. There can be a use-it-or-lose-it imperative that takes over the zeitgeist. Having good institutions helps stabilize things when you find yourself in that situation. The USA used to have good institutions. It might yet again. The Chinese don’t and largely haven’t. Can they build them? We’ll see.
A war would be a terrible idea, from the point of view of China, the US, or humanity in general. I don’t agree that it is only up to Mr. Xi, it is also up to the US to act in a way that fosters cooperation. We can pretend the 4 Trump years never happened all we want, but a foreign rival nation should be terrified about what sort of government we might be electing in 2024. Even our moderate administrations are not friendly, even if they are more predictable.
I suspect it might be Very Bad if the doctors gave President Xi only a year to live. Only a year to unify China in his lifetime. The longer we can draw this out the better.