TSMC warns China-Taiwan war would devastate global chip supply

The head of Taiwanese tech giant and major Apple supplier Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) warned an invasion of the island would render his factory “not operable” as tensions rise ahead of a potential visit by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who was re-elected in 2020 with 281,776 votes to represent U.S. House California District 12 which is located entirely within San Francisco, encompassing most of the northern California city.

TSMC warns China-Taiwan war would devastate global chip supply

Agence France-Presse:

Beijing, which considers self-ruled Taiwan its territory — to be seized one day, by force if necessary — said it would regard a Pelosi visit as a major provocation.

Beijing’s sabre-rattling has increased in recent years, and the possibility of an invasion has intensified under Chinese President Xi Jinping.

In a rare interview with CNN that aired Monday, TSMC chairman Mark Liu warned “nobody can control TSMC by force… If you take a military force or invasion, you will render TSMC factory not operable… These are such sophisticated manufacturing facilities. It depends on the real-time connection with the outside world, with Europe, with Japan, with the US.”

The Taiwanese firm dominates more than half of the global semiconductor market, with clients including Apple.

MacDailyNews Note: For the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Michael J. Green and Bonnie S. Glaser, explain the United States’ “One China” policy:

When the United States moved to recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and de-recognize the Republic of China (ROC) in 1979, the United States stated that the government of the People’s Republic of China was “the sole legal Government of China.” Sole, meaning the PRC was and is the only China, with no consideration of the ROC as a separate sovereign entity.

The United States did not, however, give in to Chinese demands that it recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan (which is the name preferred by the United States since it opted to de-recognize the ROC). Instead, Washington acknowledged the Chinese position that Taiwan was part of China. For geopolitical reasons, both the United States and the PRC were willing to go forward with diplomatic recognition despite their differences on this matter. When China attempted to change the Chinese text from the original acknowledge to recognize, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher told a Senate hearing questioner, “[W]e regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word ‘acknowledge’ as being the word that is determinative for the U.S.” In the August 17, 1982, U.S.-China Communique, the United States went one step further, stating that it had no intention of pursuing a policy of “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan.”

To this day, the U.S. “one China” position stands: the United States recognizes the PRC as the sole legal government of China but only acknowledges the Chinese position that Taiwan is part of China. Thus, the United States maintains formal relations with the PRC and has unofficial relations with Taiwan. The “one China” policy has subsequently been reaffirmed by every new incoming U.S. administration. The existence of this understanding has enabled the preservation of stability in the Taiwan Strait, allowing both Taiwan and mainland China to pursue their extraordinary political and socioeconomic transitions in relative peace.

Please help support MacDailyNews. Click or tap here to support our independent tech blog. Thank you!

Shop The Apple Store at Amazon.


    1. There is no war in Taiwan. Stop with the false information.

      China would own the US only if the US refuses to ally itself with the world’s other democracies or allows its foreign policies to be dominated by short term transactional interests (i.e., continued nondemocratic unpatriotic corporate dominance over government). If the US continues to lead democratic nations and encourage trade and sustainable practices, it has nothing to worry about. TSMC may be a dominant player, but it’s not the only chipmaker in the world.

      For the current generation, direct Chinese ownership of assets is the least of the worries. The total assets of the USA are estimated to be about $US 126 trillion; China’s wealth is about $US 75 trillion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_wealth
      Chinese direct investment in the USA is estimated at about $US 120 billion, less than 0.1% of America’s balance sheet.

      Rant on:

      I understand your concern about China owning a lot of stuff, and working successfully towards global hegemony. The flight of western corporations to outsource to Asia has increased US middle class fears but that doesn’t mean that China owns a significant percent of US wealth. Corporate policies since the late 1960’s actually transferred wealth from the US working class primarily to the US billionaire class, and to a much lesser extent the Asian working classes. It’s the self-interested US billionaires that are most concerning. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the US, they exist only to take from everyone else.

      China is a leading purchaser of US treasuries, doing as many foreign governments, but it’s a single digit percentage of total foreign investment to the US. Foreign investment, and the pricing of natural resources in dollars for international exchange, has let the US live beyond its means since WW2. The whiners of the current generation fail to understand this. They complain about taxation and prices of stuff, distract themselves with digital toys drugs and consumer excess … not realizing they live in the easiest, lightest-taxed time in American history.

      Why would Xi want to buy into the US rust belt? He has many more lucrative investments to make in his nation. But Xi cannot be successful without support from the US billionaires. In the long run Xi also cannot be successful if he continues to rely on unsustainable energy and environmentally destructive practices. So the international chess match begins.

      The issues that the US keeps ignoring are much more than financial. To be healthy, a body needs both exercise and study. The nation needs to become sustainable in terms of education, health, energy, consumer behavior, and balance sheet. Only when this happens will the US be able to reliably maintain its standard of living. If it doesn’t whip itself into shape, it will not be resilient to foreseeable future events, and the working class will continue its slow slide into poverty. The financial concern is only a small part of the full picture. One can’t run debts and trade deficits forever. But the current two political parties are happy to pander to the basest concerns of its constituents, kick the can down the road another generation, when China will probably have more wealth and power than the US, plus primary access to natural resources around the world. The US simply prefers to kick back and enjoy cheap imported consumer junk rather than working hard to sell more than they consume. This isn’t partisan as some on this forum attempt to make it, this is universal fact.

      If America wants to be free, it needs to start by consuming less and creating more, and stop blaming China (or Mexico, or whatever) for everything it is too lazy to do itself. There is very little either political party has done to achieve sustainability because the typical American voter doesn’t want it. It’s too hard for them. That is the problem.

      1. Well….I’m going to say it.

        The fastest way for America to get more kids into engineering and related sciences is a return to the basic family unit of a mother who chooses to stay home and a father who chooses to support them.

        It’s not the ONLY solution nor the only style of living, but by and large this is the most stable for most.

  1. “There is very little either political party has done to achieve sustainability because the typical American voter doesn’t want it.”

    Under Trump and in the past week the chip bill passed, indicates BOTH parties are working on growing manufacturing in the U.S. I don’t know where you get information citizens are NOT interested in “sustainability” or it’s too hard whatever that means, not certain of the context.

    I’ll wager that if you ask MDN denizens or the U.S. population if we should manufacture more in the U.S. as opposed to China — a resounding YES and well over 50% affirmative. BTW, do agree with the majority of your post…

  2. I support a “One China” policy.
    Mainland China should belong to the democratic island nation of the Republic of China (Taiwan).
    The current government of mainland China (People’s Republic of China) is an illegitimate, murderous dictatorship.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.