The Geopolitics of Semiconductors U.S.–China Tech Competition

It's a little surprising that when I look at the news these days, semiconductors are not only

featured in technology articles, but also in diplomacy and security news. In the past, semiconductors were just parts that fit inside smartphones, but now this atmosphere is so strong that countries are determined by semiconductors. Actually, at first, I didn't know this well, so I thought it was a little funny. After watching the semiconductor regulation news, I thought simply, "Oh, then smartphones won't sell at all." But when I looked it up, there were many types of semiconductors, different technology levels, some were fine, some were sensitive, and much more complicated than I thought. So this time, I'm going to be honest with you about why advanced semiconductors are attached to politics, how competition between the U.S. and China affects society and the economy, and how I understand it.

Everyone knows that semiconductors are important, but these days, it is more like a feeling that the industry stops if it is not at the level of inconvenience without it. Automobiles, not to mention smartphones and laptops, also have a lot of electronic functions these days, so without semiconductors, production itself can be twisted. In addition, high-performance semiconductors are the key to AI services and data centers, so if you fall behind here, you can directly talk about national competitiveness. As a result, it appears that the country has no choice but to treat advanced semiconductors as strategic resources rather than simple components. It is understandable that even in the military and security sectors, technologies such as computational power, communication, and surveillance are connected to semiconductors, so it can be dangerous if they are easily given to the other party.

Semiconductors, after all, feel like both technology and a tool that connects them to national power. I believe that the key to this competition is the battle over who can have the level of chips and equipment rather than the lack of a problem.

Companies appear to be the first to falter when the US and China compete for semiconductors. Previously, the goal was to produce good performance and sell a lot, but nowadays, regulations such as export control make conditions such as where to sell and where to make them much more important. Regulations or restrictions can block sales even after making products, or complicate the process of obtaining necessary equipment or materials. If this continues to accumulate, companies will find it difficult to plan and invest carefully. And this effect spreads farther than expected. For example, if a country tightens regulations, production may move to other regions, and if costs increase in the process, product prices and service costs may eventually be affected. Why does it end up suddenly becoming expensive for consumers, but behind the scenes, politics and industry are moving together. On the other hand, there is a feeling that the semiconductor industry is more divided like a block as the movement to make our own by country increases. If there is a flow of one side trying to build supply chains between the other and the other, efficiency may decrease, and it feels a little ambiguous because it is choosing to obtain stability instead.

In the future, the competition for semiconductors will not end simply with technology development, but will continue to be tied up with foreign and industrial policies. Therefore, it seems that companies should prepare production or supply channels in various directions so that they can withstand changes in regulations, not just because they are good at technology. This is because, from the standpoint of the country, the entire industry is unlikely to be shaken too much only with minimal rules or cooperation standards, rather than completely closing the door. This issue felt more realistic because I was interested in circuit design. Even if you design well, if production and supply are blocked, you may not be able to come out as a product, and if some parts become difficult to obtain, you may have to change the design itself. In the past, I thought that performance design was the best, but these days, I think design that can be made realistically and supplied stably will be very important. Something is a little bit bitter, but that seems to be the industrial atmosphere right now.

What I felt while looking for this topic was that high-tech semiconductors are both a technological problem and a political, economic, and security problem. As the competition between the United States and China intensifies, companies must carry regulations and uncertainties together, and the impact can come back to us in the form of production costs or product prices. Therefore, semiconductors are no longer just in engineering textbooks, but they feel like they have become the core of moving society as a whole.

I'm interested in circuit design, so when I study electrical engineering in the future, I want to not only delve into technology but also understand this external environment. To be honest, talking about politics is a bit difficult and sometimes tiring, but semiconductors seem to be an area that cannot be avoided. On the one hand, it feels cool that semiconductors are the foundation that allows people to use devices and services stably even in this complex reality. I hope that the circuit or chip I designed in the future will help it come out in a form that can be used in reality without being shaken even in this large flow.