4 ms·

> TSMC with its global influence has been a huge factor for guaranteeing safety of the island and peace in the Taiwan strait. This narrative is echoed around t

> TSMC with its global influence has been a huge factor for guaranteeing safety of the island and peace in the Taiwan strait. This narrative is echoed around the internet, but if you study the actual history of the Taiwan Strait Crises (which started before the semiconductor was invented), it never comes up in official discussion or analysis. See Kissinger, for example. Cynically, this narrative was possibly promoted by the USG/Taiwan-lobby to put lipstick on what has always been a naked display of power politics. Washington wants its First Island Chain to contain China [1], and Beijing doesn't want Washington to have it. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_chain_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_chain_strategy

sopchi 4y ago
I was very surprised to find in the recent New Yorker long article about Chinese-Taiwanese Relations [1] that TSMC was only mentioned at the very end. I was expecting this to be central to the story. I recommend reading the whole thing to anyone who has an hour to spare. "One of the most important deterrents to war is Taiwan’s role in producing semiconductors. Seventy per cent of the world’s most advanced chips are manufactured there, many of them at the Taiwanese Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. [...] China is similarly reliant on the highest-end chips produced in Taiwan; it doesn’t have the equipment or the expertise to manufacture them. If China seized control of Taiwan’s semiconductor factories, it could conceivably force local workers to run them. But the factories depend on a constant flow of Western material, software, expertise, and engineers, without which production would cease in a matter of weeks. Pottinger told me, “If the Chinese took the factories, there’s no way the West would help run them.”" [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/11/21/a-dangerous-game-over-taiwan https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/11/21/a-dangerous-ga...
wahern 4y ago
> Cynically, this narrative was possibly promoted by the USG/Taiwan-lobby to put lipstick on what has always been a naked display of power politics. I also suspect this narrative is at the very least supported if not conceived by Taiwan as propaganda. But we don't need to be cynical. What this narrative does is establish in the minds of Americans a shared interest in Taiwan and, arguably, even a shared identity. That's not intrinsically bad, malicious, nor even disingenuous on the part of the Taiwanese. Especially for a country as large and resource rich (in every meaning of the term) as the United States, all overseas interests and identities are built principally on fictions; some built very deliberately, but many which grew organically. IMO, the high technology dependency narrative fits comfortably between pure ideology (democratic solidarity!) and pure real politick, e.g. oil. Unlike the case with oil interests, the narrative speaks to a coevolution of our industrial and economic bases on equal terms in tandem with political ideology, and thus posits a shared future. And given how quickly and easily the narrative has spread, it has a strong organic character to it--even if Taiwanese political strategists planted the seeds, the soil was more than accommodating. Such a crafted narrative to me seems more like an invitation than manipulation. (Either way, admittedly such characterizations are dependent on one's chosen perspective.) Nonetheless, it should be recognized for what it is; taken literally it leads to erroneous conclusions. If the U.S. aggressively defends Taiwan in an invasion attempt, it won't be because of TSMC and fears of a chip shortage; it'll be because the American public has become invested in the idea of a free and democratic Taiwan, and willing to believe and accept that the US's long-term self-interests are furthered by putting itself and its citizens in the way of considerable, even existential harm. The story of TSMC would just be one of many--albeit an important one--along the road which brought the nation to that state of mind.
- mr_toad 4y ago
  > If the U.S. aggressively defends Taiwan in an invasion attempt, it won't be because of TSMC and fears of a chip shortage; it'll be because the American public has become invested in the idea of a free and democratic Taiwan, That, and the concern about China’s long-term ambitions, and what sort of precedent letting them take Taiwan unchecked would set.
  - ngcc_hk 4y ago
    Ukraine is a good example. However for this, japan and s Korea would be in play. They have to submit to the power that control the sea or 1/2 of Pacific Ocean down to Australia (with a base in South Pacific say).
eagleinparadise 4y ago
The real reason we care so much... just look into how power is created by international laws allow landmasses to project power X number of miles out into the ocean. That control plays right into the most influential lanes of commerce in the world. Sometimes, real life feels like a game of Command and Conquer or Risk, when you zoom back out and boil things down to their most simple form.
philwelch 4y ago
If anything the semiconductor industry raises the stakes for the US. The vast majority of chips are manufactured in Taiwan, China, and South Korea. A China that can capture Taiwan can also blockade South Korea, and therefore put the entire world economy at its mercy.

sopchi 4y ago

I was very surprised to find in the recent New Yorker long article about Chinese-Taiwanese Relations [1] that TSMC was only mentioned at the very end. I was expecting this to be central to the story. I recommend reading the whole thing to anyone who has an hour to spare. "One of the most important deterrents to war is Taiwan’s role in producing semiconductors. Seventy per cent of the world’s most advanced chips are manufactured there, many of them at the Taiwanese Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. [...] China is similarly reliant on the highest-end chips produced in Taiwan; it doesn’t have the equipment or the expertise to manufacture them. If China seized control of Taiwan’s semiconductor factories, it could conceivably force local workers to run them. But the factories depend on a constant flow of Western material, software, expertise, and engineers, without which production would cease in a matter of weeks. Pottinger told me, “If the Chinese took the factories, there’s no way the West would help run them.”" [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/11/21/a-dangerous-game-over-taiwan https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/11/21/a-dangerous-ga...

wahern 4y ago

> Cynically, this narrative was possibly promoted by the USG/Taiwan-lobby to put lipstick on what has always been a naked display of power politics. I also suspect this narrative is at the very least supported if not conceived by Taiwan as propaganda. But we don't need to be cynical. What this narrative does is establish in the minds of Americans a shared interest in Taiwan and, arguably, even a shared identity. That's not intrinsically bad, malicious, nor even disingenuous on the part of the Taiwanese. Especially for a country as large and resource rich (in every meaning of the term) as the United States, all overseas interests and identities are built principally on fictions; some built very deliberately, but many which grew organically. IMO, the high technology dependency narrative fits comfortably between pure ideology (democratic solidarity!) and pure real politick, e.g. oil. Unlike the case with oil interests, the narrative speaks to a coevolution of our industrial and economic bases on equal terms in tandem with political ideology, and thus posits a shared future. And given how quickly and easily the narrative has spread, it has a strong organic character to it--even if Taiwanese political strategists planted the seeds, the soil was more than accommodating. Such a crafted narrative to me seems more like an invitation than manipulation. (Either way, admittedly such characterizations are dependent on one's chosen perspective.) Nonetheless, it should be recognized for what it is; taken literally it leads to erroneous conclusions. If the U.S. aggressively defends Taiwan in an invasion attempt, it won't be because of TSMC and fears of a chip shortage; it'll be because the American public has become invested in the idea of a free and democratic Taiwan, and willing to believe and accept that the US's long-term self-interests are furthered by putting itself and its citizens in the way of considerable, even existential harm. The story of TSMC would just be one of many--albeit an important one--along the road which brought the nation to that state of mind.

mr_toad 4y ago
> If the U.S. aggressively defends Taiwan in an invasion attempt, it won't be because of TSMC and fears of a chip shortage; it'll be because the American public has become invested in the idea of a free and democratic Taiwan, That, and the concern about China’s long-term ambitions, and what sort of precedent letting them take Taiwan unchecked would set.
- ngcc_hk 4y ago
  Ukraine is a good example. However for this, japan and s Korea would be in play. They have to submit to the power that control the sea or 1/2 of Pacific Ocean down to Australia (with a base in South Pacific say).

eagleinparadise 4y ago

The real reason we care so much... just look into how power is created by international laws allow landmasses to project power X number of miles out into the ocean. That control plays right into the most influential lanes of commerce in the world. Sometimes, real life feels like a game of Command and Conquer or Risk, when you zoom back out and boil things down to their most simple form.

philwelch 4y ago

If anything the semiconductor industry raises the stakes for the US. The vast majority of chips are manufactured in Taiwan, China, and South Korea. A China that can capture Taiwan can also blockade South Korea, and therefore put the entire world economy at its mercy.