LOL! Still, does China currently possess the entire supply chain for chips (like Samsung)?
Trade War with China
- Thread starter Ultra
- Start date
- Status
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I thought Trump wasn't in any rush for a deal... Before he wanted to look like he was the one in command and China was begging to him for a deal. Trump is worried he'll be at the G-20 for nothing making him look like he was stiffed on a date if Xi is not there. No one talks to him and is always seen wandering around while other countries are talking to one another. Trump always wants to be seen in the position of power.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Do you have to be like Samsung I thought the vertical integrated FAB is going the way of DODO bird extinction andit does not have to be
China did have all the semiconductor chip from SOC to MOdem etc But the development is uneven due to lack of investment and market
Why buy domestic when you can buy offshore at the same price?
Yes, that's my point. And also China's not yet ready to engage in a prolonged standoff with the U.S. and its allies. It has become a revisionist power way too early when the status quo hegemon still has every tool to contain the former's rise.
Maybe to make it look like he "made" him show up.
Is this Maxton guy living in an alternate universe?
His whole point seems to rest on the argument that without American tech Huawei is dead, and that Huawei's death means China cannot develop on its own. What logic is that?
First of all, Huawei isn't just not-dead, it's living very well. Its phone business might have been impacted, but in general its 5G business is doing just fine. In fact it won contracts in Russia, Saudi Arabia, and granted access to the Brazil and South Korea market. These are all regional powers and very important markets. Huawei is doing just fine in Southeast Asia as well, that's another market with twice the population of the US and it has already replaced the US as the second biggest trading partner with China in the first 5 months of this year.
Can this guy please know that so far there are only a GRAND TOTAL of TWO countries that banned Huawei on a government level besides the US? Australia and New Zealand? And they have a GRAND TOTAL of combined population of 30m? That's less than some of the smallest provinces in China! Shanghai and Beijing each has a population close to that number, and with all that population concentrated in one big city, they each will probably have more 5G base stations than AU and NZ combined.
I have a message to these American academics and policy makers. Please don't let your own propaganda brainwash you. Both claims that China is somehow a monster that's going to decimate the US tomorrow and claims that China is going to collapse tomorrow are just too stupid and ridiculous. Yes China is neither going to suddenly become the greates power nor going to suddenly collapse.
As Chinese military watchers I think we all know that in the military sphere China bas been under embargo and sanctions by the US and the West for decades. But did it stop China's military development? I think we all know the answer.
His whole point seems to rest on the argument that without American tech Huawei is dead, and that Huawei's death means China cannot develop on its own. What logic is that?
First of all, Huawei isn't just not-dead, it's living very well. Its phone business might have been impacted, but in general its 5G business is doing just fine. In fact it won contracts in Russia, Saudi Arabia, and granted access to the Brazil and South Korea market. These are all regional powers and very important markets. Huawei is doing just fine in Southeast Asia as well, that's another market with twice the population of the US and it has already replaced the US as the second biggest trading partner with China in the first 5 months of this year.
Can this guy please know that so far there are only a GRAND TOTAL of TWO countries that banned Huawei on a government level besides the US? Australia and New Zealand? And they have a GRAND TOTAL of combined population of 30m? That's less than some of the smallest provinces in China! Shanghai and Beijing each has a population close to that number, and with all that population concentrated in one big city, they each will probably have more 5G base stations than AU and NZ combined.
I have a message to these American academics and policy makers. Please don't let your own propaganda brainwash you. Both claims that China is somehow a monster that's going to decimate the US tomorrow and claims that China is going to collapse tomorrow are just too stupid and ridiculous. Yes China is neither going to suddenly become the greates power nor going to suddenly collapse.
As Chinese military watchers I think we all know that in the military sphere China bas been under embargo and sanctions by the US and the West for decades. But did it stop China's military development? I think we all know the answer.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The italics part is a danger to be aware of certainly, and we can certainly analyze that when the danger grows but at this point, we are moving away from the danger. Your point can be to point out a remote danger of Chinese isolation, but once again, you should realize that we are not nearly in that vicinity.
The bold part is incorrect. Instead, the hegemon has RUN OUT of tools to contain China. After the US tech ban failed to take down Huawei but instead provided it with an opportunity to indigenize and continue operations, it is apparent that the US played this card too late and its tools are all broken/expired. The US tried to play the allies card and everyone with critical technologies said they will continue to do business with China but eliminate US parts. This shows that America's toolbox is quite empty.
You have to keep in mind, that on the cusp of overtaking the resident superpower is about as good a time as it gets to decouple, because it's not up to China to wait until every one of its industries has overtaken America's to begin. If the US were stupid enough to let that happen, it wouldn't be considered a rival at all. The danger was that the US would realize very early on that Chinese tech can grow extremely fast and decoupled maybe 10 or more years ago before there was an overtake was easily foreseeable; that would have been very difficult for China. But for the US to act now only when it sees itself being dethroned, it's quite frankly very good for China and very late for the US.
Last edited:
It’s actually not too early at all. China is already adequately larger in PPP terms, capital accumulation and talent in China is more then adequate to tackle the most challenging of high tech industrial development, and Trump is the best president under which this conflict can take place due to his fracturing of traditional allegiances. Not to mention Russia and China are now on the same shortest side of the triangle with the US as odd man out, whereas it used to be post-Nixon China and US on short side with Russia at third furthest point of triangle. There is probably no better time than now.
Josh Luo's whole argument is that because China doesn't command the whole supply chain, thus when the world shuts off on China, China will find it difficult to develop because many of the key technologies are outside of China.
This argument has a fundamental flaw in a key presumption, and that is when the US is not at good terms with China, the world will shut China off. In fact this couldn't be further from the truth.
First of all, there's no way the US can truly cut off all ties with China. It's simply not doable. What Trump can do is to impose tariffs, but without Chinese exports the US economy would crash too. Yes some production may shift outside of China, but which country has the infrastructure and labour pool in place to take that kind of shift, to fill in the void that China leaves? The truth is no country in the world has that kind of production capacity, at least not in the short term.
Also, China is the largest trading partner of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, ASEAN, Australia, New Zealand, and quickly on its way to become the largest trading partner of Europe. Why do these countries want to shut China off or severely undermining their trading relationship with China by cutting off key technology supply, at the risk of undermining their own economic growth? Just because the POTUS thinks so?
Let's face it, America's global sway is weakening by the day. This doesn't mean it's not the sole superpower anymore, it just means that when other countries' real interests are at concern, it's not easy to simply convince them to risk all of that for America's unrealistic wishes.
This argument has a fundamental flaw in a key presumption, and that is when the US is not at good terms with China, the world will shut China off. In fact this couldn't be further from the truth.
First of all, there's no way the US can truly cut off all ties with China. It's simply not doable. What Trump can do is to impose tariffs, but without Chinese exports the US economy would crash too. Yes some production may shift outside of China, but which country has the infrastructure and labour pool in place to take that kind of shift, to fill in the void that China leaves? The truth is no country in the world has that kind of production capacity, at least not in the short term.
Also, China is the largest trading partner of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, ASEAN, Australia, New Zealand, and quickly on its way to become the largest trading partner of Europe. Why do these countries want to shut China off or severely undermining their trading relationship with China by cutting off key technology supply, at the risk of undermining their own economic growth? Just because the POTUS thinks so?
Let's face it, America's global sway is weakening by the day. This doesn't mean it's not the sole superpower anymore, it just means that when other countries' real interests are at concern, it's not easy to simply convince them to risk all of that for America's unrealistic wishes.
- Status