If China does take over Taiwan, it would be a disaster for all; hopefully Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) realizes that.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is focusing on microchip wafer fabs, starting from buying raw wafers to diffusion, photolithography, implantation, etching, and physical and chemical vapor deposition, before reaching the finished wafers — the front end of the process.
Taiwan also excels in packaging and testing, commonly known as the process’ back end. The whole process takes one-and-a-half to five months, commonly known as cycle time.
Although Taiwan ranks first in process integration in the world, the equipment used comes almost entirely from foreign companies: Applied Materials, Lam Research and KLA in the US; Hitachi, Toshiba, SECO, Sumitomo and Advantest in Japan; and ASML in the Netherlands — not to mention software from the US, such as programs from Synopsis and Cadence.
The most recent success in China by reverse engineering was only achieved with equipment from Applied Materials. As long as equipment imports are blocked, the Chinese semiconductor industry would be guaranteed to lag behind, because just reverse engineering will not do.
Some experts in the field have pinpointed this as the most critical and an almost insurmountable challenge for the Chinese semiconductor industry.
If its chip industry were to take over Taiwan’s facilities without equipment imports from the US, Japan and the Netherlands, Taiwan’s industry would shut down. Ironically, a shutdown of Taiwan’s chip industry would cause worldwide panic.
To avoid a chip shortage caused by a crisis in the Taiwan Strait, paired with the uncertain situation in North and South Korea, customers would inevitably force Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) to move abroad.
It takes billions of New Taiwan dollars to build and start operating a semiconductor fab. The US has the ability to create new technologies and design software, but has lost the ability to manufacture them.
TSMC was not built in a day. The US has many geniuses, but not enough engineers. Most US students do not like science, mathematics or engineering.
Even in my doctoral program in political science, most of the students and even professors did not have the mathematical skills to compete against my old classmates in a Taiwanese law school. Deplorable and sad.
TSMC has complained that the US does not have enough engineers with the necessary skills and experience. Nearly 80 percent of TSMC employees’ compensation comes from year-end bonuses based on the company’s profit. Can a US company allow that? Because of this, no matter how many employees China recruits from TSMC, it seldom fully utilizes them.
You might ask why the Chinese government has not subsidized the industry? It did, but if the compensation, no matter how high, is not aligned with the company’s and each employee’s performance, it would never be motivating enough for high-tech people. Throwing money on it would not help.
China will not invade Taiwan this year or next. Nor in 2023 or 2024, for that matter. A better strategy for Beijing is to ratchet up its rhetoric, and try to intimidate or pressure Taiwan in other ways.
Ironically, and from the perspective of realism in international relations, what if the US becomes self-sufficient in chips so that it and South Korea might want Taiwan to be taken over? It would cut down on the competition.
This is a complicated world, indeed.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor of political science at California State University, Fullerton.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS