Thanks to the communist side of the Strait, awareness of the threats facing Taiwan is higher than at any time in the last 50 years. It’s an opportunity to educate the world about all the country has to offer, from public health and disaster relief to entrepreneurship and democratic governance. One of Taiwan’s greatest strengths — its semiconductor industry — however, is also potentially a terrible political liability. Taipei and friends of Taiwan should be careful how they wield it.
The idea that China could shut down large swaths of the global economy with an attack on the center of 60% of the world’s microchip manufacturing, including 92% of the world’s most advanced chips, has captured the imagination of foreign policy types. Here are just a few recent headlines: “The World Relies on One Chipmaker in Taiwan, Leaving Everyone Vulnerable” (The Wall Street Journal); “The World is Dangerously Dependent on Taiwan for Semiconductors” (Bloomberg); “Why threats to Taiwan are a nightmare for tech” (Axios).
An industry-destroying Chinese invasion is not the only scenario being spun. Some envision the PLA seizing control of fab shops and forcing them to continue manufacturing at gun point. To say this is highly unlikely is an understatement. These are sophisticated workplaces, not iron mines.
Yet another, more plausible scenario is a longer-term pressurizing of the Taiwanese political environment that eventually yields accommodation of China. The way things are headed in cross-straits relations, though, this would necessitate a sea change in the politics of both countries, as well as both of their relationships with the US. For example, if China were to apply pressure by seizing one of Taiwan’s outlying islands — say, Pratas or Kinmen or Taiping — it would certainly not make Taiwan more pliable. Not only would Taiwan’s resolve stiffen, but so would the resolve of its many friends around the world.
At the end of the day, the threat to the global supply of semiconductors is only as great as the general threat of an invasion. And at that point, we’ve got bigger problems than the price of electronics.
Meantime, the narratives around the threat to global supply chains play into another very powerful current in US politics. Disruptions in the supply of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic sensitized Americans to the security of supply chains across the board. The current chip shortage has trained this concern most intensely on semiconductors.
And where Americans see crisis, American politicians and companies see opportunity. Already, lawmakers have proposed legislation to offer subsidies to chipmakers, and industry reps are fanning out on Capitol Hill to nail down support. One American tech CEO summed up the situation by repeating the advice offered by then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel at the height of the 2008 financial crisis: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”
Only the most intrepid defender of economic freedom dares stand athwart this surge yelling “Stop.”
A similar push is underway in Japan and Europe and, perhaps most consequentially, in South Korea. South Korea already leads the world in the memory chip side of this industry. Its effort to catch Taiwan in the production of microprocessors is very credible — as well as curiously unburdened by the security concerns posed by the active threat out of Pyongyang.
The downside for Taiwan in all of this is obvious. A global effort is coalescing around the need to move semiconductor production out of Taiwan. This cannot be good for Taiwan’s economy in the long run. Not only does it constitute an assault on Taiwan’s industrial crown jewels, but the ultimate and inevitable crash in prices certain to follow so many countries pursuing self-sufficiency is going to hurt, too.
Twenty years ago, Craig Addison coined the term “silicon shield” to describe the deterrent effect that Taiwan’s role in the semiconductor industry has on China’s dreams of unification. “China will have to think long and hard,” he said, “before taking any military action to disrupt or destroy Taiwan’s economy.” The current consensus around the threat to Taiwan has turned this assessment on its head. The concentration of microchip production capacity in Taiwan is coming to be seen more as provocation of China than deterrent. More importantly, if defense of Taiwan becomes primarily a matter of global supply chain security, then once it is no longer so central to the world’s supply of semiconductors, the world will have less stake in its fate.
The defense of Taiwan is important to the world for many reasons. Chinese belligerence gives its supporters a good opportunity to advertise them. Overemphasizing Taiwan’s role in the global supply of electronics, however, could backfire in a major way. Those who care about Taiwan’s security should be very careful with how we talk about it.
Walter Lohman is the director of The Heritage Foundation’s Asian Studies Center.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at