Semiconductor lead is inevitably going to fall within the decade. So will the military hopes of ever protecting Taiwan.

sho 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

> So will the military hopes of ever protecting Taiwan.

I don't think there are too many military analysts who would claim that the USA could "protect" Taiwan if China was really determined. The USA still retains the ability to significantly increase the cost, both militarily and economically, of an invasion, and relies on this - successfully, to date - as a deterrent.

I think most people recognize however, even in Taiwan, that in terms of pure practical facts on the ground, not even the world-beating US military can overcome geography. Taiwan is 100 miles off China's cost, Guam is 2800 miles away. It is difficult for me to imagine anything, barring some incredible technological advantage that the USA shows no sign of possessing, that could outweigh such a tremendous home-turf advantage.

It is very hard to come up with a realistic, or even semi realistic, scenario in which China does not end up with Taiwan if it really wanted it.

▲

sampullman 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's a very pessimistic take, or optimistic I guess, depending on perspective.

Looking at the Chinese semiconductor development trajectory, and considering that TSMC won't be sitting on their hands, "within a decade" seems really unlikely.

▲

rapsey 4 days ago | parent [-]

Taiwan and China are not like north and south korea. People move between countries freely. Many TSMC engineers have moved to the mainland.

China has immense engineering capability and is replicating the entire western semiconductor supply chain within its borders.

They have the money, the engineering capability, the will and full support from the government. It is inevitable.

	▲	sampullman 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I am aware, I live in Taiwan. While TSMC engineers can be poached "move between countries freely" is not true because moving from China to Taiwan is not so easy. The key word you mention is "replicating." They'll be chasing for a while still, and it's not clear that they'll be able to leap ahead. Copying is much easier than real innovation.

▲

windexh8er 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I was under the impression, for years, that the US had the appropriate government, scientists and engineering in place to protect the castle. However given what I've seen in the last few years - I agree that it seems inevitable China will surpass the US in the next decade and will hold both cards and a grudge.

It's amazing how China has doubled down into STEM and green energy while the US has done exactly the opposite. The CHIPS Act propped up a company further driven into the ground by Pat Gelsinger. The last few administrations have had no focus on driving innovation and technology - only propping up the Tech Bro market making money off of attention and ads. Maybe, just maybe, the US should stop electing geriatric and short term gains ignorance?

The US needs to dig its head out of its ass if it wants to continue to be recognized as the global power it once was.

	▲	slaw 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		In my opinion 2008 is the year when the US started to fade as a center of innovation and global power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_socialism

▲

impossiblefork 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Taiwan could be protected if they were given practical control of nuclear weapons or similar, i.e. nuclear weapons sharing.

Securing Taiwanese independence is going to be necessary for the EU to ensure that there isn't a US microchip monopoly, and the only way the EU can do this is by the aforementioned means.

▲

sharpshadow 4 days ago | parent [-]

Zelensky at the MSC 2022: “If … results do not guarantee security for our country, Ukraine will have every right to believe that the Budapest Memorandum is not working and all the package decisions of 1994 are in doubt”[0]. 4 days later Russia invaded Ukraine. At the time it was said that Ukraine pursuing nuclear weapons was the last straw, but who know really.

If Taiwan is going to place nuclear weapons on its territory the conflict would probably escalate quickly.

0. https://kyivindependent.com/zelenskys-full-speech-at-munich-...

	▲	impossiblefork 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Could well be a trigger. This is a reason to do it quickly by having already existing, tested nukes handed over for use by the threatened state. There is a problem with this kind of reasoning though. It's like, somebody shows up 'try to grab my gun and I'll shoot' but the thing is, he might shoot anyway, and if you grab the gun, maybe you'll get hold of it. When someone threatens something, that's not reason for stepping down, passivity or anything like that, it's reason to immediately risk everything on an attack to take away the thing he has that allows him to threaten you. By threatening something he only demonstrates that he must be attacked immediately. I like an example I gave earlier with hostages. It's Monday, someone has taken a hostage and threatens to kill unless left alone. The next day he's taken another, he has the same threat. On friday, he has five. Now, you realise you should have attacked on Monday when your attack only risked one death. So today, the question might be 'why didn't we start building nukes last year?'