>Why does China’s near abroad matter to them? Why do they care about national unity? Why would they want unobstructed access to the deep-water Pacific?
Are questions that answer themselves. But they are the wrong questions.
It’s not China that’s the hostile actor here. It’s not China that’s meddling in distant affairs. This very thread pertains to an unilateral, unprompted hostile action by the US against China. And note that it’s not Trump’s doing. He’ll just do more of it, more openly.
And all of this is very much in line with America’s (at least) seven decades old strategic posture:
Taking out 95%+ of ledging edge semi that adds trillions to western hi tech and supports strategic industries seems worthwhile. Doesn't have to be invasion, but I'd expect grayscale shenanigans on island power grids etc now that there's less reason to hold back.
The US now has an isolationist regime. I think that's fairly likely to happen in the next few years if it is going to happen. Ukraine is also done unless Europe (probably Poland) steps up in a big way.
It doesn’t. But as the Empire’s grip on the world is slipping it will become more brazen, aggressive, openly selfish, erratic. Quod licet Iovi etc. A role Trump was born to play. But, as Europe’s economic woes after four years of D rule should tell you, it’s not just him who’s happy to cannibalize the Empire’s subjects.
I don't feel like China operates under the same geopolitical philosophy as Russia, they have other ambitions that I think are better served by avoiding wars. But who knows given the way things are going.
It's clear if you pay attention, that China's putting inordinate efforts into other places. Africa is one example. (Probably the principal example.) So they clearly have ambitions that lay outside of Asia.
No one fakes moves like that at that scale. They're serious about what they're doing.
Because war is economically expensive, they subscribe to certain philosophy and would prefer continue trading with Taiwan rather than turning it to rubble.
That being said, even if they would. Under that assumption, I find the idea to further provoke them to doing that morally repulsive. It's an egomaniacal move that disregards Taiwanese people.
The calculation is a bit different for a dictator though.
They won't be affected personally (unless the country rebels against them) so they can be fine to tank the economy if it gets them closer to some other goal (such as megalomaniac world domination).
A military fight wouldn't serve China's interests. Pouring money into their domestic fabs and using the same market-flooding and subsidies that they're known for in other fields to take customers from TSMC would be a smarter move. They probably wouldn't be taking over the high-end CPU/GPU marketshare anytime soon, but could put significant pressure in other areas while developing capability.
Two reasons why TSMC operations in Taiwan would cease: 1. Skilled workers to develop and operate the fabs. I doubt it that the Taiwanese would happily continue to innovate under a (possibly violent) Chinese regime. 2. Supply of fab equipment from ASML and other Western companies.
Hope what doesn't happen? The invasion? Or the embargo?
The Beijing regime is already in intense sub-threshold warfare on Taiwan and reiterate their false claim to the country's territory at every opportunity.
Denying them access to the finest silicon processes will no doubt trigger more narcissist punishment tantrums delivered through PLA military provocations, or sabotage, or trade attacks, etcetera, but it's hardly going to matter for whether they launch the invasion. They will do that once they've built so many new nukes and cruisers that they like their chances against the total of Taiwan's defense forces plus any other military that could be expected to intervene.
