Washington’s China policy usually oscillates between containment and engagement. Prior to former US president Donald Trump’s trade dispute with China, the US placed greater emphasis on cooperation than competition with China, especially at the economic level, as it believed that the mutual benefit of cooperation would benefit Americans.
Since the start of the dispute, mutually beneficial trade has gradually been replaced with competition, undermining the basis for cooperation between the countries. Now, US-China competition has evolved into a technology war that is defining the direction of relations between the two powers for the foreseeable future.
The US recently issued a ban on electronic design automation software, which the Chinese semiconductor industry has generally said was aimed at preventing China from advancing to a 3-nanometer process and limiting its IC design capacity at 5 nanometers and manufacturing capacity at 7 nanometers.
In July, the US Senate passed the CHIPS and Science Act, which sets aside US$52 billion to subsidize US semiconductor companies and provides tax breaks for companies investing in semiconductors. The subsidized companies would not be allowed to invest in Chinese semiconductor manufacturing processes more advanced than 28 nanometers for the next decade. This shows Washington’s determination to build its own semiconductor supply chain and contain China.
The US has also proposed a four-nation alliance of chip manufacturing with Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, called Chip 4, widely regarded as an effort to control semiconductor exports and technology outflows to prevent China from obtaining high-end technology from these nations.
Competition between the US and China is a struggle for dominance of the world economic order.
As early as 2015, Beijing unveiled its “Made in China 2025” project, which it hoped would, together with its “China Standards 2035” policy, allow it to shed dependence on foreign technology and make Chinese standards world standards.
The industries that the “Made in China 2025” initiative focuses on have become the main targets of the US-China trade dispute, while the US seeks to fundamentally eliminate China’s manufacturing potential. Another key point of the dispute is to ensure that vital electronic components are in the hands of the US or its allies, to break China’s monopoly on them.
The Korea Institute for Industrial Technology and Trade has said that Taiwan’s inclusion in Chip 4 would help the US and the EU reduce their dependence on Taiwan over the medium and long term. This highlights Taiwan’s key position in the US-China technology war.
Taipei should develop a plan to cope with the intensifying competition between Washington and Beijing, which should adhere to the following principles:
First, the government must ensure that key advanced technologies remain in the hands of Taiwanese manufacturers to maintain Taiwan’s strategic position.
Second, cooperation with other democratic countries must be based on reciprocity, such as through bilateral economic and trade interactions with the US, to ensure that in exchange for chip support the US provides support in advanced fields in which it has an advantage, such as artificial intelligence and electric vehicles.
Third, if the opportunity presents itself, Taiwan should participate in the Chip 4 alliance, as a four-way dialogue with the nations would provide Taiwan an additional channel for international participation.
Yang Chung-yueh is a researcher at a think tank.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS