[HN Gopher] Why a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be a catastro...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Why a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be a catastrophe for China
       and the world
        
       Author : jseliger
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2021-07-05 17:07 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (doxa.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (doxa.substack.com)
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | Given how smoothly chinas invasion of Hong Kong went, I wondered
       | how far back one had to go to find similar articles about how
       | China couldn't invade Hong Kong. But searching for the headline
       | with Hong Kong instead of Taiwan only returns results regarding
       | China and Taiwan.
        
       | bloniac wrote:
       | The world would have much bigger problems than semiconductors if
       | a full blown war happened in Taiwan.
       | 
       | It won't happen anyway. China is just Sabre rattling and beating
       | its chest for political gain.
       | 
       | If they were going to do it then it should have been on Trumps
       | watch, when there was no certainty at all the USA would back its
       | allies in a conflict. Not that there's much certainty now.
        
       | coldtea wrote:
       | > _Thus the semiconductor market in 2021 is a fully baked cake.
       | You can't just swap some ingredients out in response to a one-off
       | military invasion, and then keep trucking along. No, we'll have
       | to bake a whole new cake if TSMC goes bye-bye. And that will be
       | painful for everyone, everywhere._
       | 
       | Well, tell that to the economists that praised "competitive
       | advantage" out-sourcing of everything:
       | 
       | "Smith outlines the basic theory behind comparative advantage;
       | that it makes more sense to manufacture a good which you have the
       | necessary expertise and materials to produce than to
       | inefficiently allocate your resources to the production of a good
       | that some other country can produce for less overall cost."
       | 
       | Yeah, until that other country becomes an enemy, or a monopoly,
       | or has you by the balls - or another country snaps it or cozies
       | up with it...
       | 
       | But, yeah, who would have though that would ever happen in the
       | "end of history" era.
        
       | mytailorisrich wrote:
       | This is all hypothesis. Everyone can draw any scenario
       | imaginable.
       | 
       | Here the author claims that TSMC and Taiwanese fabs will become
       | "unavailable" in case of an invasion by the mainland. He also
       | makes the claim that Taiwanese would 'disable' those fabs
       | themselves in order "to protect customer IP".
       | 
       | The former is of course a possibility, the latter is rather more
       | strange. Neither are explained.
       | 
       | It seems to me that the mainland would have an interest in
       | protecting those fabs and in resuming "business as usual" as soon
       | as possible, so I would imagine them drawing plans to make that
       | happen in case of a military invasion. Fabs may also be very
       | useful in order to keep any sanctions towards China at a minimum:
       | Would the US want to push for, say, a trade embargo if that meant
       | cutting off semi supply? Maybe but that would make these
       | sanctions very painful for the West and their allies.
       | 
       | On the Taiwanese side, there might be a temptation to sabotage
       | the fabs but IMHO that would be a shot in the foot: If the fabs
       | are gone and the mainland does take control of the island then
       | they would never allow such concentration in Taiwan to happen
       | again so Taiwan would fade forever. And if the invasion fails
       | then there would probably be a massive push to rebuild outside of
       | Taiwan. All in all the destruction of the fabs would probably be
       | used as a bluff/threat to push the US to protect Taiwan as much
       | as possible (although the US would likely never directly attack
       | Chinese forces, and reciprocally).
        
       | akomtu wrote:
       | The Taiwan saga will be another example of the 5 stages of
       | acceptance. Right now the western world seems to be in denial.
       | Once China does a small incursion into Taiwan, we'll advance to
       | the next stage - anger. Inability to stop China will take us to
       | bargaining. When China ignores the west, we'll get into the
       | depression stage. When CCP's troops start patrolling Taiwan
       | streets, and I think it'll happen in just ten years, we'll reach
       | acceptance. By that time, the US will better have fully
       | functional foundries in Arizona.
        
         | api wrote:
         | I heard it put this way once: the US can't stop a Chinese
         | invasion of Taiwan any more than China could stop a
         | hypothetical US invasion of Cuba.
         | 
         | In both cases it's a battle right off the coast of a superpower
         | with pretty massive home court advantage to the closer nation.
         | Right off shore means no supply lines and the ability to just
         | fire shit from shore at enemy ships and planes. The entire
         | industrial output of the closer nation is right there.
         | 
         | Note that I am leaving thermonuclear escalation off the table.
         | Nobody really wins that one. I'm imagining a scoped
         | conventional conflict in the form of an intervention.
        
           | jollybean wrote:
           | China could easily stop a US invasion of Cuba merely by
           | putting several garrisons of soldiers in Cuba.
           | 
           | They probably could not stop an 'all in invasion' - of course
           | - but that's not the point. The point would be to raise the
           | cost significantly i.e. 'invading Cuba would mean war with
           | China'.
           | 
           | There are a lot of things the US could to do raise the cost
           | of the invasion of Taiwan, but it's hard. Every move comes
           | with a counter move.
           | 
           | The US would have to coordinate with everyone else on this.
           | They're trying to do that but it's hard.
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | Given some warning the US could actually stop a Chinese
           | invasion of Taiwan. The US Navy has the second most powerful
           | air force in the world just behind the US Air Force. That's
           | the rather insane scale we've invested into the current
           | military.
           | 
           | Cruse missiles are a different story, China could trivially
           | destroy TSMC's factories. That said, the US is hardly the
           | only nation likely to react to such an invasion.
        
             | mytailorisrich wrote:
             | I think that the US would not want to directly attack
             | China, and China would not want to directly attack the US.
             | The US would provide weapons, intelligence, etc. but would
             | not fire on the Chinese because that would be an unlimited
             | and uncontrolled escalation, in effect a declaration of war
             | on a country actually larger than them, a nuclear power
             | which government could not afford to be seen as weak and
             | defeated. That's partly why the US have always refrained
             | from entering into any formal obligation to intervene
             | militarily.
             | 
             | Likewise, I don't think it would be in China's interest to
             | destroy TSMC's fabs. Quite the opposite, I think they would
             | probably want to keep them intact if they can help it and
             | resume business as usual as soon as possible.
        
             | publicola1990 wrote:
             | US couldn't stop the Japanese from invading Philippines.
        
               | jimmygrapes wrote:
               | A lot has changed since then
        
       | pcrh wrote:
       | While semiconductors are a very important part of industry, it's
       | naive to think that a loss of Taiwanese output would be as
       | disastrous as this article suggests.
       | 
       | Consider the effects of the coronavirus pandemic, they are much
       | larger than any such loss would have, yet this pandemic didn't
       | have any acute large-scale effect on geopolitics (though it will
       | like have a longer-term, and some what unpredictable effect).
       | 
       | A much larger long-term effect of China's ambitions towards
       | Taiwan would likely be seen in China's growing economic might
       | resulting in a shifting of alliances/allegiances of East Asian
       | countries between the US and China.
        
       | tester756 wrote:
       | But why actually cutting-edge semiconductors are *this*
       | important?
       | 
       | Isn't endgame war tech solved problem for like N decades?
       | 
       | What's the usecase? better AI? computer vision? research?
       | 
       | aren't computational resources for those provided by super
       | computers?
        
       | bsd44 wrote:
       | Perhaps when the US and its allies withdraw troops from the
       | Middle East, they can move them to Taiwan to protect it from
       | China.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | mastry wrote:
       | Near the end of the article, Steve Blanks is quoted...
       | 
       |  _Alternatively, Beijing may seek to negotiate with or coerce
       | Taipei (or both) in order to allow China sole access to TSMC and
       | block chip exports to the United States, thereby securing China's
       | own supply while crippling American industry._
       | 
       | But earlier in the article it's mentioned that the US effectively
       | has a "kill switch" on TSMC (by cutting off key supplies needed
       | to fabricate semiconductors). If this is true, then the scenario
       | presented by Blanks seems unlikely -- or am I missing some
       | detail?
        
         | kposehn wrote:
         | You aren't missing any detail from what I understand. A core
         | focus of US national security this decade is securing chip
         | fabrication capability that is not endangered by global supply
         | chain disruptions - or making the cost of the disruption
         | unreasonably high to the disruptor.
        
           | taurath wrote:
           | Mutually assured unproductivity seems like the setup for the
           | next bond plot.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-05 23:02 UTC)