Pretty dramatic stuff but unsure how this will benefit the US since obviously to have this much western talent and IP the Chinese weee investing heavily. Remains to be seen if the west is going to do likewise.
The move by the Biden administration is about advanced weapon systems and China’s dangerous rhetoric—especially in the shadow of Russia’s actions.
The war in Ukraine demonstrates that, if anything, the US underestimated the advantage of western weapon systems. That has little to do with the steel and mechanical engineering and much to do with chips and software.
The US has to take China’s threats seriously. They are boasting about Hong Kong. They feel emboldened by it. I don’t think the rhetoric is empty about Taiwan. And if they take the island it will only embolden China further.
If China takes Taiwan it changes the entire global power dynamic. If they try and fail it is probably the beginning of the end of the Chinese government as we know it.
> It's more an act of the cold war, and less an attempt to help US industry profit more.
As well as to make companies finally decouple from China.
Everybody saw China shake down Apple and should have taken the hint to start moving operations. Yet none of the C-suite in the US were willing to risk their bonuses by being the first company who pulls out of China while their competitors don't.
This puts the boot into the short-term capitalist thinking and forces the issue.
It’s like when universities pushed state governments to implement COVID pandemic policies because they know they all need to but they also know the first one to do it alone will take it in the shorts.
>This puts the boot into the short-term capitalist thinking and forces the issue.
Yes, but companies where never expected to or supposed to implement these policies. It will be worthwhile to use chinese factories until the moment they are cut off.
Advanced weapons don't need 5nm chips. How will this hamper anything in China long term? Germany for example cut off its biggest energy suppliers is preparing for an economic war with China while claiming they're moving to renewables with a supply chain that is owned over 80% by China. Where is Europes manufacturing these days? India, China, Vietnam, Turkey? Turkey is completely alienated by Europe and is turning more extreme by the day as a result(they applied to the "EU" in 1987 btw). Vietnam went to apologize for Blinkens statements to the Chinese representatives not to long ago and India is actively defying western sanctions even though they dislike China and said that their problems with China are not related to the Ukraine situation at all and that they will deal with China on their own if they need to.
Usually, when you prepare for a war, you set up alternative supply chains, build up your capabilities, set up your independent energy/natural resource supply chain and then cut off what you consider your enemy. How is Europe to build up their military for a confrontation if they can't even power their own factories?
I thought Trump was bad at making these kinds of strategic decisions, but this administration takes the cake. Completely haphazard, ill conceived, badly planned decisions that only make sense if you turn back the clock to 1990.
If I was really generous and speculative I'd say that the plan is to make everyone divest to Taiwan in the hopes that Taiwan is then more important to everyone. But can nobody read a map? You have China 100km across the strait and the US 7000 km away. Last time they tried to upgrade the F16s they had to have an emergency landing in Hawaii. We had missile tests on this island which had to be stopped because the missiles had launch failures. This is local Taiwan news. Cut off China completely and move everything to Taiwan. What does China have to lose from invading and embargoing Taiwan at that point?
If there is one lesson from the Ukraine conflict its not to turn Taiwan into another Ukraine. It's to start some kind of dialogue, and try to involve parties such as India in that dialogue.
EDIT: since the person below had to come up with this "don't talk to terrorists" nonsense, i have to respond.
This isn't some bank raid or a high school fight. These are conflicts with the biggest nuclear power that exports 1/3rd of earths natural resources and the biggest manufacturing and military manpower on the planet.
You ABSOLUTELY talk to them. Estonia made statements like that as well. You ABSOLUTELY talk to a neighbour that has 377 your surface area in land and the worlds biggest nuclear arsenal. What's wrong with these people?
Let's say they are terrorists for the sake of the argument. All the more reason to find a solution. Or if you really want a military confrontation, prepare for it silently and then show your cards when you're ready.
Nobody says don’t talk to them. Talking doesn’t mean having to trade.
Europe as an island, as presently configured, is strategically screwed. Europe within NATO, buttressed by AUKUS and the American Pacific alliance, is incredibly strong.
You will find that most high quality products are not from china but US, Europe, Japan and SK. US has already secured an ulimited amount of food water and oil. And we have more guns and ammo than anywhere: we already spend more on military than Russia is right now at war. So not completely unprepared, but yes we are missing a few links in the supply chain, most importantly raw materials
We have been talking to them about Taiwan for literal decades. They have never budged. Every single CCP administration has been absolutely adamant that reunification will happen. The only realistic solution is military deterrent to stop them from acting on their desires.
Imo the purpose of these sanctions is to ensure that Chinese supply chains remain reliant on Taiwanese chips. If they invade, they will lose access. The export value of Chinese products made with Taiwanese silicon is massive, it would be a huge economic blow to lose this access.
> You ABSOLUTELY talk to them. Estonia made statements like that as well. You ABSOLUTELY talk to a neighbour that has 377 your surface area in land and the worlds biggest nuclear arsenal. What's wrong with these people?
I understand what you're saying, but what do you expect countries that want to be left alone to say when the president of that huge country goes on TV and talks about going back to old borders? How do you talk with a country that is influenced by people that say your country, your language, your culture, etc, shouldn't exist?
These countries still have a memory of what it was to be under Russia's rule. They know what happened to them after the Soviets and the Nazis made their deal. For many it's a "if we're going down, then let's go down fighting kind of thing". The bully may win the fight, but they'll go home with a black eye.
Yes. The Biden admin is creating a two-front war with Russia and China.
I think a key to understanding their thinking is that they believe that the US is winning wrt. Ukraine. And having solidified European allies, now is the time to use that momentum and full-on confront China.
So you would end up with a broken Russia, a humiliated China, and another unipolar American moment like the 90es.
Buy why and why now? Is there any significant change of circumstance w.r.t US-China relationships in the past 5 years which wasn't initiated by the US.
It all sounds a bit like Treaty of Versailles like clamp down from the US.
The answer to that is Xi Jinping, and the way he has not only adopted a level of personal power not seen by any Chinese leader since Mao but has shifted China's domestic and foreign policy in a much more authoritarian direction. This has included cutting back on what foreign firms can do, substantially increasing the rhetoric against Taiwan and making clear plans to prepare for an invasion, cracking down on Hong Kong and reversing the 'one country two systems' promise, and taking actions against the Uyghur minority that are so extreme as to arguably be genocide, amongst other actions.
The West pretty universally believed in what the Germans called 'Wandel durch Handel', or change through trade, and the idea that China would become both wealthier and more liberal by becoming an ever more important player in global trade, and give up revanchist imperial ambitions like wanting to take over Taiwan. That has been shown to have been a false belief, as rather than moderating China became stronger and more authoritarian.
None of these seem a direct/targeted hostile act towards US. While many of these things are concerning, none of these seems like "crossing a red line" (for eg like USSR basing missiles in Cuba) as far as it relates to the US.
It rather more feels like a policy stemming from ideological preference from Biden and US policy makers.
Also has US expended all possible efforts to diffuse tensions and attempt rapprochment, because this policy seems like a one way steet.
This present measures do seem a unilateral targeted hostile measure from the US, not even considering the interests of the allies of US.
Atleast some of the other Asian nations wouldn't see things in such a black and white manner. Would South Korea, Singapore, even Japan think on the same stark lines as US on this?
> Yes. The Biden admin is creating a two-front war with Russia and China.
It’s important to be clear here that this administration isn’t creating a two-front “war” or conflict with Russia and China but responding to egregious activities by both parties.
It should also be noted that all of these moves have wide bipartisan support. Something like 99-1 senate votes and the like. Trump, a Republican, campaigned on being tough on China after the Obama administration and enacted punitive trade tariffs and the like. Republicans and Democrats campaign in states like Ohio where manufacturing was hollowed out that they’ll “be tough on China”.
Western countries (Germany - Russia, U.S. - China) spent decades trying to open markets and provided peaceful dialog between countries while managing sore spots without conflict. Russia chose to invade Ukraine and disrupt emergent markets. China chose to become a dictatorship and engage in hard-line international policies.
It’s important to remember this less as the US and western allies decoupling and more so responding to a decoupling that already occurred lead by both Putin and Jinping. You can know that this is the case because both leaders tell you that this is the case in their “rejection of the international order” or “American lead order” or similar rhetoric.
You're simplifying an incredibly complex process. You can't just "flip a switch."
Biden is doing what is necessary, like Trump was doing before. Being too closely tied with a foreign adversary leads to bad outcomes, as we are now seeing with Russia/Europe over Ukraine. If Biden doesn't act swiftly and draw that line China will think Taiwan is there for the taking. Simply can't happen.
> Usually, when you prepare for a war, you set up alternative supply chains, build up your capabilities, set up your independent energy/natural resource supply chain and then cut off what you consider your enemy. How is Europe to build up their military for a confrontation if they can't even power their own factories?
Again, you can't just flip a switch. The war in Ukraine was a surprise in that timescale. We are preparing for war now. And that means hard, fast decisions that won't be easy.
It's not like the US was pumping out aircraft carriers before 1941.
Russia has done exactly that. They have been preparing for sanctions since 2014 and they were hugely successful. Save some twitter keyboard warriors everyone relevant has acknowledged that at this point Russia has won the economic war. Europe is heading for a deep recession and Russia is already on its way back out[1].
There is really no masking the incompetence of these administrations. Pretending that they couldn't have acted more strategic even after decades of firesale exporting US manufacturing to China is just wilfully misleading. Exporting your entire manufacturing for short term profit isn't "integrating economies", it was just pure greed.
Comments like the one above are also not helpful. To improve upon a dire situation you have to first acknowledge that there is a problem. But somehow the democrats are pointing at Trump saying he was a foreign agent and the Republicans are pointing at the democrats saying Biden is a foreign agent but the course is the same, full steam ahead.
One of the first things Biden did was remove most of the Trump imposed tariffs only to impose something even more chaotic a bit later. The current administration is now claiming they will move Missile Defence from Saudi Arabia to Ukraine. It's like watching a toddler throw tantrums and wanting his toys back. As if these things are just plug and play systems you can pull off here and put back there.
From your source: "Western sanctions, launched in response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, have wounded Russia’s long-term prospects." Russia hasn't demonstrated that it can continue to manufacture advanced weapons (the ones with chips) quite the opposite. Wars tend to repel recession because they mobilize and borrow, that's not all good. Interesting that you clearly support Biden bringing industry back to the US.
It's pretty disturbing and disgusting that the President would threaten to strip people of their citizenship for having the 'wrong' job.
Is there any crime you could commit in the US that is do bad it would result in loss of citizenship?
No other country would behave this way, but I guess we should expect that from one of only two countries that taxes all it citizens worldwide, even if they've never even visited the US.
Given that US citizenship is difficult and ludicrously expensive to get rid of(presumably as some kind of punishment for wanting to do so) possibly some of these people might actually be happy about if they are dual citizens.
Generally (and it's still hard in these cases) you can lose your citizenship if you are convicted of treason, found to have served in a hostile foreign country's army, working for a country's government when you are the same nationality, etc.
I'm sure a LOT of countries have laws like these in one form or the other. I'd imagine that the inside baseball on this is the US is effectively declaring China an enemy, and so therefore can make this threat. The only question is how actionable it is.
I found this [0] that the logic followed is a citizenship generally has to be voluntarily resigned but several actions can make you "accidentally voluntarily resign" it so to speak. It's strange to me Biden would do this especially since we aren't in open war with China but every day I wake up this world gets more strange. It does suggest certain crimes must be done with the intent to lose your citizenship as you suggest which makes Biden's action even more dangerous.
I did not find anything there that can make one "accidentally voluntarily resign".
>"It's strange to me Biden would do this"
I might have skipped it but where / when did Biden specifically threaten stripping citizenship. The search does not confirm such threats have been made.
By forcing Chinese-Americans in particular (as in Chinese, who also hold American citizenship) to choose between their work or their citizenship he is defacto threatening to strip their US citizenship. Dual citizens have basically been handed a choice: give up your US citizenship to continue working in your field or find work in the US.
This isn't true. US born citizens, excluding those naturalized or with a dual citizenship elsewhere, simply cannot be stripped of citizenship for any reason. Because this would reduce them to statelessness.
Although the UN treaty signed on this isn't binding for the U.S., it would certainly break a taboo and give justification for other countries to reduce their citizens to statelessness while they're in the U.S., thus blocking the possibility of repatriating them back to their home country.
The government can't strip people of citizenship for this, but they can make it a crime for citizens to work for these firms. Though if you renounce, it is no longer a crime.
It’s an interesting move. Amidst a strengthening US dollar, a sharp drop in Chinese food security that will likely depend on the US, and a pretty severe real estate crisis unfolding in China; China’s economic leverage has likely done a 180 and begun to look very vulnerable.
Removing dependence on China for things, increasing China’s dependence on an independent and functional Taiwan, and just generally establishing pecking order is probably a really strong geopolitical move.
I would expect that China is further shy of making serious retaliations at the moment due to dependence for food and fear of manufacturing moving to India.
It was an US unilateral move after CHIPS4 couldn't agree on export controls that basically killed 1/3 of their semi revenue, i.e. it seems more like US desperation after being unable to get East Asian semi on board after realizing merely "sprint" strategy wasn't enough to stay ahead of PRC, but must sprint and hobble. To me it looks like essential admission that PRC will make it sooner than later, and now US is trying to buy time at all cost despite lack of cooperation from allies who will most likely start de-americanizing supply chains for that 400B PRC semi pot.
>dependence on TW
>shy of making serious retaliations
The opposite is happening, US trying to cut PRC Off TW semi that US is 90% dependant in. So PRC now has more incentive to meddle with fabs on the island to disrupt US high tech at little cost to her own industry. I expect we're trending towards developments that will end in PRC disrupting TW fabs in the coming years to destablize US supply chains. Otherwise PRC leverage is still the same, she still has calorie food sufficiency, with now guaranteed long term supplies (grains + fertilizer) from RU. Managable real real estate crisis still being managed. Meanwhile PRC still has controls over most of supply chains and rare earth production, F35 made from PRC metals just got waiver. The reality is, PRC hasn't made serious retaliations so far because it didn't want more high tech decoupling, but once decouple past certain point, PRC hands will become freer to retaliate. We'll have to see TSMC/Samsung and other if waivers stop next year.
It's more an act of the cold war, and less an attempt to help US industry profit more.