10 ms·
US-China War over Taiwan: All Measures Short of a Cross Straits Invasion
- roenxi 6y agoIt always seemed a bit unlikely that a manufacturing superpower gets defeated on its own turf. If WWIII breaks out over Taiwan, it is hard to see how China doesn't get what it wants in the manner the article describes. There is some evidence between the way the US was handling the middle east and last years notable war [0] that the military future involves drones. It isn't at all obvious from the peanut gallery that China will be at a disadvantage unless the situation gets apocalyptic. Even then, if they just wait or apply slow pressure it seems likely they'll eclipse the US to the point where Americans just can't afford to sustain operations on China's doorstep. China has all this money and America has all those debts. Wars are expensive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war
- xenihn 6y agoChina will be able to temporarily convert its commercial industrial factory output into wartime use and just spam drones at Taiwan. All of the infrastructure is already there, a switch just needs to be flipped. The US did the same in WW2, though instead of drones back then, it was planes, tanks, and munitions.
- echelon 6y agoThe US has nukes now. The fight wouldn't last long enough to make use of those factories.
- Koiwai 6y agoImplying preemptive nuclear strike, nice. China also has nuke you know, there is even a term for it: "mutually assured destruction".
- echelon 6y agoPlease don't jump to conclusions. I wasn't implying advanced strike. The assumption was that both parties were already at war. per, > convert its commercial industrial factory output into wartime use and just spam drones at Taiwan. I also assume they'd use tactical nukes or munitions.
- Koiwai 6y agoYou failed to understand China also has nuke, if you intend to nuke a Country with nuke, do it preemptively, or don't.
- adriancr 6y agoYou're failing to understand game theory here. What good are nukes if you are not willing to use them and let others take what they want. By having a very real threat of nuclear escalation you keep others at bay. That's how the US was kept out of cuba, that's how Russia was kept out of western europe. Here, it's a very real threat of escalation: - if China invades, US escalates conventionally and wipes out what it can. (conventional US missiles are not that far from tactical nukes, US navy will easily wipe out Chinese navy) - Then China can escalate further by attacking US forces via land-to-sea missiles, aircrafts, etc, a few sunk aircraft carriers and you'll see the US out for blood. - tactical nukes will likely be used by any side if it loses too badly. - US could always do some risky air-strikes against Chinese leadership and close the war that way (or nukes start flying) - China can't really reach the US mainland that easily and US has quite a few anti-missile forces off japan and on the mainland. - at this point, it's survive who is best prepared. I'm assuming US will come off a lot better then China.
- Koiwai 6y agoFor the record, there is no China "invades" Taiwan, it's merely reclaiming it. US does NOT recognize Taiwan as a independent nation. Taiwan doesn't have nukes, and China would not use nuke against them. Once US intervenes, game changes.
- est 6y ago> The US has nukes now As if China has not?
- throwaway4good 6y agoExactly. The war is already lost. And for every year that China outgrows the US it just becomes more obvious.
- throwaway4good 6y agoThe alternative is for the US to pick a fight in an asymetric manner. Sow discontent in the periphery of China (HK, Xinjiang, Tibet). Tech war.
- jimbob45 6y agoWhat good is a war on/for Taiwan? The magic of Taiwan is the brains of the scientists and the tribal knowledge of the researchers. Killing them/getting them killed isn’t going to help you acquire them.
- bertjk 6y agoCan you name a single war that was started with logical reasons more than emotional ones?
- Apocryphon 6y agoPlenty of wars have been waged over territorial or economic reasons and realpolitik.
- throwaway4good 6y agoYou assume that China would be the initiator of the war.
- _wt8k 6y agoTaiwan has symbolic value. The CCP has made "reunification" a major part of its "platform" for decades, and a leader who accomplishes that will go down in history in the pantheon of Chinese leaders alongside Mao. So, a CCP leader seeking glory would attempt unification if he judges that China can win. On the other side, the US is Taiwan's security guarantor, and if the US lets China take Taiwan, the US will lose credibility with its Asian allies. Asian countries wary of China may recalculate the power calculus and feel the need to acquiesce to China. Taiwan is also a symbol of the democratic ideals of China's founding and proof that democracy is compatible with so-called "Asian values." Destroying Taiwan eliminates an ideological threat to the CCP's non-democratic legitimacy. Strategically, Taiwan is an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" that China wants.
- BLKNSLVR 6y agoSome of what you're describing has already come to pass with Hong Kong. China is applying the squeeze to Hong Kong that skirts the bounds of definition of the agreement as part of the British handover, ie. one country, two systems[1]. It's fairly easy to see China's future actions with any expanded territories that the rest of the world may allow with eyes downcast. [1]:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_country,_two_systems https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_country,_two_systems
- rmk 6y agoThe PLAN has been building up its navy and is expected to handily exceed the USN in the next 5 years. Basically, in a short period of 5-10 years, the PLAN has grown from insignificance into a serious adversary that builds capable ships that can give the USN serious headaches. Most of the PLAN's numbers are in corvettes and attack craft, to US's heavier and larger vessels (PLAN has something like 2 or 3 aircraft carriers to USN's 11 something). The PRC has also invested heavily in missile technology and is perhaps ahead of the US in anti-ship missiles. It has also built up small positions that can be built up easily on the disputed reefs etc. in the South China Sea in anticipation of getting blockaded. I say all of this in support of the thesis that drones will play a less decisive role than the navies of the two countries.
- jonnybgood 6y agoMost of what you state about China doesn't mean anything in modern warfare. It's not about who has the bigger gun or most guns, but who can use their guns most effectively. Consider that China has no experience in modern warfare or large scale conflict. How effective do you think China will be against a highly experienced adversary?
- rmk 6y agoMost of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. Both world powers (in fact almost all) have/had the best navies in the world. The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. China has already done the first part. I agree with you on the second part: the Chinese have not participated in large-scale armed conflict, so they don't have experience. But it must be borne in mind that the US has also not fought any big naval war in recent times and morale is very low because crews are being worked to the bone. Unless the USN addresses these challenges effectively, they don't hold a huge edge.
- hollerith 6y ago>Most of what I state does mean a lot. You can't project power without a world-class navy. I agree. And China has never fought a major naval war or even a major naval battle. >The two parts to a world-class navy are the ships and the men. Part 3 is competent leaders. The US has admirals that have been taught by admirals that have been taught by admirals that have fought a major war in the Pacific. (Japan has them, too.) And China does not. George Friedman says that that is an important factor.
- magicsmoke 6y agoIt's refreshing to see a take on this conflict that runs counter to the conventional take of a cataclysmic contest over an amphibious invasion of Taiwan and a frankly more realistic scenario of the PRC salami slicing it's way towards increased control of the island while trying to minimize the collateral damage an actual war would bring. The idea of imposing an inspection of all shipping into Taiwan to block military shipments while allowing civilian shipping hints of the Cuban missile crisis. Still, the US could easily run "inspections" of its own on Chinese oil tankers in the Indian ocean. That's why I'm convinced that the ultimate confrontation between China and the US over Taiwan won't happen anywhere near Taiwan at all. Rather, China will delay until they can fight the US Navy in the Indian ocean.
- ardit33 6y agoChina will absolutely get blockaded itself, as they can't project power, meanwhile get the rest of the world against them. They don't have much oil, and their economy will be crippled to a standstill. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/China_Oil_Production_vs_Consumption.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/China_Oi...
- antiviral 6y agoPerhaps this is why they are trying to rebuild a Silk Road across Eurasia, which would cross through the mid-east?
- magicsmoke 6y agoThey're going to be sucking their oil through a straw. Pipelines don't have nearly the same capacity as tankers. But they are pushing their economy towards renewables, and by the 2040s the majority of China might be powered by alternatives to oil, leaving them enough to keep their military going without disrupting manufacturing. Pipelines also have the added bonus that if the US tries to sabotage them, they've just attacked a bunch of neutral countries. Not a good look.
- 6y ago
- ardit33 6y agoChina cannot itself sustain a blockade of Taiwan if the US intervenes. It will be blockaded itself, as the US can within 48hrs blockade all commercial traffic in and out of china. China doesn't have much oil by itself, and it needs imports to properly feed its population. It will end up like those scenarios, where the sieging forces, get sieged and cut off itself. Its navy is a near-shore force, and just can't project force outside the China sea. They can completely control the part of China sea near about 200-400km near its shore, but it will be unable to go any further than that. It might end up like a Japan, 1941 scenario. They might be able to score some early surprise wins, but on the long term they are doomed to lose the war. Ps. While china is experiencing a boom like the 50s and 60s in the USA (lots of infrastructure being built), China's demographic is aging, and we might see a scenario that the current boom will just slow down, and itself end up in a situation like Japan in the 90s, or USA itself in the 70s. It will reach a peak in the next 10 years (economically) and start leveling off to more normal rates of growth.
- Koiwai 6y agoAnd at the end US nukes China, and still the good guy. Joke aside, the real question is: will US wage war on China for Taiwan. I think it's highly unlikely.
- ardit33 6y agoI think they will absolutely intervene. The sentiment in the US against china is really negative...
- Koiwai 6y agoWill US "win" if they intervened? likely, was that worth the risk? I don't think so. On the other hand, given current US political status, they might actually want a war despite the risk. "Negative sentiment" is not cause, it's propaganda for the possible declaration of war.
- adriancr 6y ago
- outsomnia 6y agoI thought the interesting point is not that the mainland can overwhelm a small island off its coast, but the likelihood of a messy escalation and stalemate. The logic that defending the island requires taking out integrated air defense radars on the mainland and the implications of that seem pretty sound. During the Korean war the larger mainland forces took everything except Busan, a port on the south-eastern side, but the US still rolled it back and today we have South Korea. On the ground, the reality of even a few weeks of that kind of urban all-out war are truly horrifying. The US and Taiwan had an explicit security guarantee treaty for 25 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-American_Mutual_Defense_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-American_Mutual_Defense_T... ...with the rise of China that mutated into the TRA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act which is more ambiguous, its basic idea is maintain the status quo. On the ground, forces are stationed in Okinawa to deter mainland aggression. In recent years the likelihood the US would in fact jump in to defend Taiwan seems to have increased, eg, reliance of US tech industry on TSMC, and Trump-era anti-China rhetoric. At the same time Hong Kong shows the mainland tolerance of democracy has dwindled.
- Koiwai 6y agoFinally someone mentions TSMC, which is probably the most important thing for US, and TSMC is "moving" to US.
- outsomnia 6y agoTSMC is important, but it is opening a single site with 2% of its existing, mainly Taiwan-based capacity in the US. TSMC total capacity in 2019 was 12 million 12-inch wafer starts https://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/manufacturing/fab_capacity https://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/manufacturing/... The new fab in Austin only has capacity for 240K (presumably 12 inch) wafers/yr, or 2% of TSMC total capacity.
- Koiwai 6y agoThat's just a part of the plan. https://technews.tw/2021/03/01/tsma-expand-its-new-lab-plans-in-the-us/ https://technews.tw/2021/03/01/tsma-expand-its-new-lab-plans...
- est 6y agoGoogle 围点打援 for more goodies.
- King-Aaron 6y agoRisky google of the day
- est 6y agoWhy? It's a more advanced & popular "quarantine" strategy, utilized by CCP's Red Army during Chinese Civil War.
- King-Aaron 6y agoBecause most western speakers won't know what this is, so you could be searching for anything - nsfw or otherwise.
- Apocryphon 6y agoThe PRC considers Taiwan part of its patrimony, yes. But both the PRC and ROC are highly developed nations integrated into the global economy. When was the last time such advanced states went to open war with each other? Such a conflict would be unprecedented since the end of World War II. And why would a regime as cautious and calculating as the CPC wish to upset the lucrative status quo with something as destabilizing as open war?
- hannofcart 6y agoYour argument makes sense when you look at the scenario from the perspective of what countries would do when their leadership acts rationally. That their leadership would act rationally is likely (though not assured) when dealing with democracies. All bets are off when you're dealing with an autocratic junta. Even worse when dealing with a one man dictatorship with enormous concentration of power in the hands of that person. That's likely why China before Xi (but post Mao) was less likely to attack Taiwan, and why China post Xi is an entirely different animal.
- Apocryphon 6y ago> That their leadership would act rationally is likely (though not assured) when dealing with democracies. It would appear the past two decades have really worn at the optimistic sheen of democratic systems. Whether populist anger generating suboptimal decisions or cabals of self-appointed technocrats and bureaucrats using democracy's own procedural motions against itself, they haven't really revealed themselves to be much more rational. > All bets are off when you're dealing with a dictatorship with enormous concentration of power in the hands of one person. I'm not convinced that the Chinese Politburo is really comparable to states such as North Korea. For all of their authoritarianism, the government has gotten modern China into a prosperous state. An irrational state can't do that. Not to mention, if one was to argue that China's rise was because of other countries outsourcing production to them, well- those nations are often democracies. > That's likely why China before Xi was less likely to attack Taiwan, and why China post Xi is an entirely different animal. Xi is definitely more aggressive than his predecessors and is playing up jingoism. But it remains to be seen if it this isn't just a whole lot of saber-rattling and rhetorical brinksmanship. To prepare for war is one thing, to be ready to actually wage it is quite something else.
- wyuenho 6y agoThis, is why Taiwan needs offensive weaponry that can reach a few 1000kms deep into China, instead of their current arsenal of "indigenous" jet fighters using GE engines that don't even have enough range to reach the shore, and short range anti-ship missiles and obsolete SAMs and missile defence. Taiwan needs ballistic missiles and bombers, and perhaps, nukes.
- fermienrico 6y agoTaiwan with nukes would lead to long term peace. South Korea used to house US nuclear arms until 1992 and they're re-considering it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea_and_weapons_of_mas...
- hollerith 6y agoJapan, Germany, South Korea, Sweden, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, and Taiwan all could've had their own nuclear arsenals by now. The reason they do not is that the US undertook to protect them. Do you wish all those countries had nuclear arsenals? If so, I recommend that you read _Command and Control_ by Strasser: it is difficult the make sure the whatever nuclear policy is chosen by a government is actually followed.
- Koiwai 6y agoAsk UNSC if they would allow that.
- _cs2017_ 6y agoIt's a bit hard to imagine the domestic opinion in China supporting a hot war with Taiwan. Unless the Taiwanese leadership decides to commit suicide by a cop and declares full independence, I suspect the Chinese public would be very uncomfortable with civilian deaths in Taiwan. Nationalistic fervor is strong, but the mainland Chinese consider the Taiwanese to be Chinese as well. So bombing Taiwanese targets would feel not very different from bombing Hunan or Sichuan province. A blockade, on the other hand, would be far more acceptable domestically. And I fear that means a greater likelihood of the US involvement: the US public (and therefore the administration) may not have the stomach to defend Taiwan from an invasion, but they might feel they cannot stand by when American cargo ships are prevented from moving freely in the international waters. On a side note, it's hard to believe that in the 21 century, when people are on the verge of manned flights to Mars, we still have a truckload of terrorial disputes all over the world (Taiwan and the rest of the mess in the South China Sea, the Northern Territories of Japan, Senkaku islands, the Chinese / Indian border, the Middle East, Crimea, etc.).
- r00fus 6y agoWhy is it hard to believe? That’s human nature. We fight over territory just like most other mammals. That we could rise above our very programming is exceptional (like the Mars lander), not the norm.
- geoalchimista 6y ago> It's a bit hard to imagine the domestic opinion in China supporting a hot war with Taiwan. Have you talked to any Chinese people who are not from Shanghai/Beijing and are not educated in an American university?
- rtpg 6y agoHave you? Most people aren't like "yeah let's go slaughter a bunch of people" in general. It's basically the null hypothesis! And the "common person" understands who will be on the frontlines in any war, and who will be completely out of danger.
- dirtyid 6y agoThis analysis aligns with some of my thinking on the subject, and it's the first time I've read quarantine seriously discussed let alone presented to congress. I've mused about quarantine policy before since it's a historic parallel of ROC closure policy (关闭政策) where ROC navy declared "closure" of ALL Chinese ports and attempted to control PRC shipping between 1949 and 1979. The policy was largely ineffective, suspended after 30 years and not abolished until early 90s. Along with ROC based U2 Black Cat squadron that conducted surveillance over mainland from 60s-70s, there is historic precedence for PRC to rationalize reciprocating similar strategies under a quarantine framework. I would not be surprised salami slicing will eventually encroach past median line as force balance shifts more towards PRC favour, PLAF will aim conduct unfettered flight over Taiwanese proper, PAP coast guard start interdicting shipping into Taiwan, which will setup pieces for escalation into blockade when timing dictates. History rhymes. Potentially prefaced via staged Tonkin style provocation that attributes Taiwan as aggressor, providing everyone opportunity to sit out. Really the fixation with DDAY style invasion needs to die, modernized PLA forces of 2035 has different capabilities as 2000, and greyscale warfare is something China has consistently utilized since reforms.
- hollerith 6y agoHas China ever interdicted a ship going to or from Taiwan? 3 minutes with a search engine didn't yield an example.
- dirtyid 6y agoPRC hasn't blockaded Taiwan due to lack of capability until even 2010s. Taiwan military was credible threat against mainland due US weapons sales in 90s and PLA being broken legacy forces. Emphasis was on peaceful reunion as a matter of impotence and policy until "peaceful" was dropped last year. PLA has modernized sufficiently and developed enough industrial capacity that Taiwan can't deter PRC conventionally could going forward, so I expect increasing pressure.
- nitwit005 6y agoIf you can gain air superiority of an island nation, and want to force them to surrender through economic consequences, why bother with a blockade? Just blow up enough of the electrical infrastructure to keep the power off for a good long while. You'll produce similar economic damage without having to hang around.
- est 6y ago> Just blow up enough of the electrical infrastructure to keep the power off for a good long while See: https://english.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=2766 https://english.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=2766
- sterlind 6y agoWow. TSMC currently consumes 5% of all power in Taiwan, and is predicted to consume up to 10% in the future, apparently because of EUV. Losing that would be catastrophic for the West, but doesn't China use TSMC chips too? Does the mainland even have a fab that could compete?
- est 6y ago> but doesn't China use TSMC chips too? Does the mainland even have a fab that could compete? China had alternative, slower but 100% domestic produced chips. See https://www.anandtech.com/show/15493/hygon-dhyana-reviewed-chinese-x86-cpus-amd https://www.anandtech.com/show/15493/hygon-dhyana-reviewed-c... Also SMIC directly competes with TSMC and was engineered by the basically the same team of TSMC people.
- lettergram 6y agoI think this fails to consider what happens when the US blocks China. - Much of the wealth of Chinas elites are inside the US - Chinas military needs oil - Chinas citizens food - Chinas industry needs markets for goods No, China wouldn’t survive an invasion of Taiwan. The US wouldn’t need to fire a shot.
- dnautics 6y agoThis is insane. The CCP cannot afford a victory over taiwan. Oil exports to china cease, during the invasion, if no other reason that no one wants their tanker to blow up en route (there are safer and more lucrative buyers) and then what? 70% of chinese energy is imported. The country comes to a stop.
- throwaway210222 6y ago(there are safer and more lucrative buyers) Only if the the Chinese navy doesn't sink those.
- dnautics 6y agoSpotted the spook. Tell your boss to buy a bug out spot. Make sure there's a well, and bring a gun, three gorges area is nice I hear; it'll be a defensible place when there are starvation riots. Tell none of the neighbors that you worked for the state, or you'll be a target. Look out for yourself. On the other hand, I suppose it's possible for the chinese navy to sink "the EU". I'm rooting for it, maybe we can finally have an end to the corrupt deutsche bank. Ps advice for you personally: all the chinese people who are trying to make it learn english. If you want to set yourself apart, you gotta do something different, learn español! It's going to be super important in the next decade. Earn yourself that pay raise!!
- throwaway210222 6y agoNope, African here. May I recommend some Lithium for your condition though.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dnautics 6y agoNah, just downed a hard seltzer and having fun. But nice try throwaway. N'y a bocoup dfricains qui defends les chines car leurs accions exploitatifs dont belt and road.
- coldtea 6y agoRegardless of whether China or Taiwan are right, etc, why does a country in the other side of the Pacific should have any say, much less "a war over", a dispute between two neighbor countries which belong to the same ethnicity and historical past, and it's pretty much a civil war? Should China or some similar power of the time have meddled in the US civil war? Or maybe the War for Independence?
- nsonha 6y agothe cause of the would-be war is that the two sides could not agree whether or not they are the same country. By calling it a "civil war" you just dismissed the whole point of it. also ethnicity has nothing to do with sovereign, nor that it exists a single "China" ethnicity, for Taiwanese people (who themselves are not a single ethnicity) to be lumped into. China just like all countries in the world, has many ethnicities. The simple answer for your question is, because one side asked, and this kind of intervention has countless precedence in geopolitics. I reckon China probably has asked for external help several times in its history.
- Apocryphon 6y agoYou could say the exact same thing about South Korea/North Korea, or Ukraine/Russia. The Cold War dies hard.
- emayljames 6y agoThat doesn't make it any better, not one single bit.
- Apocryphon 6y agoIt doesn't make it any better or right, but it does answer the OP's question of "why". Not to mention, the American Revolution was partially won because similar powers France and Spain backed the revolutionaries. The Confederacy courted both Britain and France and there was a chance that the former could have gotten involved in the Civil War over the Trent Affair. Great powers have been dipping their toes into regional conflicts since time immemorial. It's highly credulous to assume they'd do otherwise.
- walrus01 6y agoIf people want to know how/why the USA has a huge embassy in Taipei that is not actually called an Embassy, and military/defense-industrial supplies to Taiwan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act Here's the website of the "totally not an Embassy": https://www.ait.org.tw/ https://www.ait.org.tw/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Institute_in_Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Institute_in_Taiwan
- Koiwai 6y agoUS also sold military supplies to Argentina for Falklands.
- SunlightEdge 6y agoOpen question, but is it possible that China will become less nationalistic in the next few decades? What with globalization and all. The result of this being a move towards giving up on their claims to Taiwan. Certainly Europe has in many ways become less nationalistic with globalization. The idea of war in Western Europe now seems absurd. e.g. imagine the reaction to a UK politician wanting to invade Ireland again to reclaim territory.
- Koiwai 6y agoPossible? or are you in a different parallel universe? do you see a war currently happening between mainland China and Taiwan? That's the actual reality my friend.
- nsonha 6y agocan I ask a stupid question: does China really want to invade Taiwan? The Mao Zedong's China did, sure. However, for the current China, it might be better to "invade" Taiwan through cultural and economic means. As for why the tension, Taiwan is equally guilty for the previous regime (the KMT) tying their identity to a(nother idea of) unified China. Given all the propaganda built up all that time, China could not backtrack now even if they wanted.
- MagnumOpus 6y agoOnly a credible threat of invasion can prevent Taiwan formally separating and renouncing the one-China policy, making a mockery of half a century of CCP propaganda. And a credible threat of invasion needs credible plans, credible military power and credible preparation for an invasion, not to speak of propaganda to "otherise" the opponent.
- Apocryphon 6y ago> Only a credible threat of invasion can prevent Taiwan formally separating and renouncing the one-China policy, making a mockery of half a century of CCP propaganda. I mean, is that actually true once Chinese economic ties with Taiwan are so entrenched that the country finds most of its economy is beholden to China? At that point would claimed independence really matter? Not to mention, given that the PRC is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, I'm not sure if international recognition of an independent Taiwan would really go that far. Kosovo is still unrecognized by the U.N. due to Russia's intransigence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_Kosovo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_K...
- Havoc 6y agoTwo years without TSMC. Now that would be a cup shortage of note
- hollerith 6y agoCurrent chip shortage is not caused by not being able to build fab buildings fast enough: it is caused by not being able to buy enough of the lithography machines to put in the buildings. (The machines take years to build.) Where are these litho machines made? Europe, Japan and the US. If mainland China makes any at all, they are decades behind the state of the art. Point is that China's supply of chips is much more precarious than the US's because all the US has to do at the start of any hostilities with China is to make it clear to the countries that export these litho machines that the US will not tolerate any exports of the machines to China.
- Koiwai 6y agoFor anyone waiting for US to exercise justice on this matter, might want to read that article about Secretary Clinton considering selling Taiwan to China.