Former US president Donald Trump’s comments that Taiwan hollowed out the US semiconductor industry are incorrect. That misunderstanding could impact the future of one of the world’s most important relationships and end up aiding China at a time it is working hard to push its own tech sector to catch up.
“Taiwan took our chip business from us,” the returnee US presidential contender told Bloomberg Businessweek in an interview published this week.
The remarks came after the Republican nominee was asked whether he would defend Taiwan against China. It is not the first time he has said this about the nation’s chip sector, but comes amid heightened military, trade and technology rivalry between the two superpowers.
In truth, Taiwan accounts for less than a quarter of the global semiconductor market, trailing the US, but has more than a 90 percent share in the fabrication of the most advanced chips.
Right now, the global semiconductor space ought to be celebrating a boom driven by skyrocketing demand for artificial intelligence (AI).
Netherlands-based ASML Holding NV, maker of the world’s most-important semiconductor manufacturing equipment, on Wednesday reported bookings for new machines that surpassed estimates by almost 30 percent. On Thursday, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), which controls more than 90 percent of leading-edge production capacity, lifted its revenue outlook for the year.
Instead of rising in recent days, shares of both companies dropped. In addition to Trump’s comment, investors are worried about the possibility of tighter regulations on China from the current administration of US President Joe Biden.
The White House is considering the imposition of the foreign direct product rule on the chip sector, which would apply to foreign-made products that use even a tiny amount of US technology, Bloomberg News reported. Such a move would extend an existing series of restrictions aimed at limiting China’s technological advance.
Trump’s broader view of the Taiwan-US relationship, though, could be far more damaging in the long run than another round of export curbs. In his defense, the belief that Taipei took from the US is a common misperception, but the former president happens to be the loudest voice and might soon be back in the White House to act on it.
In fact, the seed of Taiwan’s technological rise was planted by US foreign policy dating back to 1950, before semiconductors were invented. Then-US president Harry Truman directed his administration to pump money into the nation’s economy.
The US was also there at the birth of Taiwan’s chip sector. Radio Corporation of America in 1976 agreed to license its semiconductor technology to Taiwan, for a fee. United Microelectronics Corp (UMC) came from this program and was one of the first companies globally to make its factories available to external clients who needed chips made-to-order.
A decade later, Morris Chang (張忠謀), a US citizen and former senior executive at Texas Instruments Inc, founded TSMC. It was the first to only make chips for external clients. Intel Corp was among the earliest customers.
Since then, the Taiwan-US technology relationship has been one of symbiosis and codependence. In the 1990s, when fledgling US chip designers could not find a local factory to make their products, TSMC and UMC were on hand to help. Qualcomm Inc, Nvidia Corp and Xilinx Inc, giants of the US semiconductor industry, would not exist today if not for the Taiwanese.
In the past 20 years, as US firms dropped the ball on technological advancement and capacity expansion, Taiwanese companies have put up the money to research and develop new processes and bet more than US$250 billion on the factories needed to churn out US-designed chips.
At the same time, Chinese companies, the US’ true rivals, have been accused of stealing technology from Taiwanese and US businesses to aid Beijing’s technological development.
If not for the risks taken by Taiwanese enterprises and cooperation — instead of unbridled competition — with US companies, Qualcomm and Broadcom Inc could not have dominated the global market for communications chips. Nvidia, Intel and Advanced Micro Devices Inc would not be ahead of China in the AI chip race.
To view Taiwan-US economic history as anything but mutually beneficial risks fracturing one of the world’s most important industrial relationships, opening the door for China to take advantage of an unnecessary fissure. Instead, the White House, no matter who occupies it, needs to understand that Taipei is not a rival; it is one of the biggest cheerleaders for US technology leadership.
Tim Culpan is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology in Asia. Previously, he was a technology reporter for Bloomberg News.
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
RSS