As Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th US president on Wednesday, many people were asking whether the turbulent US-China technology dispute that has been going on for the past few years will be de-escalated and relations will cool down as he moves into the White House.
Many commentators have expressed the belief that while Biden might not adopt the same hardline approach as former US president Donald Trump, the overall interaction between the US and China will remain unchanged.
In other words, the dispute between the two countries will not end, not even with Biden in charge.
Analyses of many of the mainstream US media companies that were frequently opposed to Trump’s actions, such as the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and CNN, have all come to the same conclusion: It is unlikely that the tensions will change just because Biden takes office.
There are several reasons for this:
First, the US has made forceful use of the key technologies under its control to hit Chinese technology firms, banning their export to China.
In response, China vowed to invest more resources in the development of its own technologies to break the blockade. This means that the US must remain on the cutting edge and defend its lead in the technological competition.
Second, Biden has emphasized that it would be necessary to restore US economic and industrial growth, reinforce the US’ strengths, and reduce its dependence on the Chinese economy.
Referring to these concerns, the US’ mainstream media companies generally share the following views: They reckon that even if Biden were to take a different approach, US-China tensions and the countries’ tendency to decouple their economies are unlikely to change immediately.
This means that the US and China would continue to work toward reducing their economic integration, and constrict high-tech knowledge and technology exchanges.
Even more meaningful from a Taiwanese perspective is that the continuation of the US-China dispute will likely further elevate Taiwan’s role.
The developments of the Internet of Things, big data and artificial intelligence are all based on faster and smaller computer chips.
Therefore, the semiconductor industry is at the center of the US-China dispute.
The ban Washington imposed on Huawei Technologies Co prohibits US companies from trading with the Chinese firm, and also covers non-US companies that uses US technology and knowledge. While this might indeed have been a blow to Huawei, it also led to losses for US companies.
Therefore, there have been proposals that instead of prohibiting transactions with Chinese firms, it would be better for the US to promote cooperation between its own firms and those of its allies, to build a technological and industrial line of defense against China.
Taiwan and South Korea are often named as important allies in these proposal, thanks to their prominent position in the semiconductor industry.
In an opinion article in the New York Times on Dec. 14 last year titled “Pound for Pound, Taiwan is the Most Important Place in the World,” Ruchir Sharma, chief global strategist at Morgan Stanley, said: “As the Cold War between China and the United States intensifies, that importance will only continue to grow.”
The reason that Taiwan holds an advantage over South Korea is that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co has superior technology, but does not compete with its US clients like Samsung does, Sharma said.
Although technologies advance on an almost daily basis — today the semiconductor industry might be leading the way, but tomorrow it could be quantum technology or satellite and space technology that play the decisive role — the key to maintaining its status as the “most important place in the world” continues to be Taiwan’s technological strengths and its strategic position.
Therefore, Taiwan and the US signed a scientific and technological cooperation agreement on Dec. 15 last year.
Not only does the agreement emphasize the deepening of technological cooperation between Taiwan and the US, it also stresses the need to develop and expand new collaborative relations between the two nations.
In addition to semiconductors, other fields — such as Earth science, astrophysics, long-term ecological research and space and satellite technology — are also mentioned in the agreement.
It also highlights the urgent need to establish a legal framework to enable and promote joint scientific research, which would spur innovation, and ensure research integrity and the protection of intellectual property rights.
The agreement is not only a diplomatic achievement, it is also a technological and economic achievement.
Chiang Ya-chi is an associate professor of intellectual property law at National Taipei University of Technology.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS