China’s export controls justified for safeguarding own devt rights
At a time when the global high-tech industrial chain has been disrupted by US-led hegemonic acts, it is unreasonable and unfair for the West to expect China to maintain the West’s supply chain interests while China’s interests are being hurt.
China’s export controls on crucial semiconductor materials are hitting supply chains and stoking fears of shortfalls in Western production of advanced chips and military optical hardware, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday. It claimed that China’s germanium and gallium export controls “have led to an almost twofold increase in the minerals’ prices in Europe over the past year.”
Chinese authorities have made it clear that China’s export controls on key minerals are legitimate measures to safeguard its own national security.
It is no secret that germanium and gallium can be used for semiconductor applications and military equipment components. China’s adoption of export controls is to ensure that these minerals are used for legitimate purposes so as to safeguard China’s national security and interests, and better fulfill its international obligations.
Amid a complex and volatile international political and economic environment, there is nothing wrong with China taking necessary measures to protect its own security, and safeguard the stability of its own industrial and supply chains.
Given the heightened focus on the security of industrial and supply chains by countries worldwide, it is entirely reasonable and legitimate for China to take appropriate measures to safeguard its development rights, as well as its national security and interests.
China’s implementation of the export controls comes as the US rallies its allies to squeeze China out of key technology sectors such as semiconductors on the grounds of “security concerns.”
This so-called security competition has been extended beyond traditional security boundaries and become a direct blow to China’s industrial and supply chains. Under unprecedented challenges and pressure, it is only natural for China to take measures to safeguard its own interests.
For years, China has been exploiting its limited rare-earth resources to supply these key metals at the expense of its domestic environment to support the development of global strategic emerging industries such as semiconductors. Now that the global high-tech industrial chain has been disrupted, why can’t China take a more cautious and efficient approach when it comes to using its limited mineral resources to protect its own national interests and reduce the loss of its strategic resources?
China’s imposition of export control measures is not intended to ban exports of relevant items, instead, it is intended to better maintain the security and stability of the industrial chain by supply adjustment. China will still meet the needs of the international market under the provisions of its Export Control Law.
While China does not want to engage in malicious competition with the West, China possesses the necessary capabilities to address Western “decoupling” efforts and high-tech pressure, a strategy that serves the purposes of safeguarding China’s national interests while showing respect for international rules.
Most developed countries have implemented controls on their strategic mineral resources. The US and the EU have included gallium and germanium on lists of key minerals under “special attention,” and the two minerals are included in the export control scope of the Wassenaar Arrangement control list of the US- and EU-led multilateral export control mechanism.
By comparison, China has produced the majority of the world’s germanium and gallium output, far exceeding its share of these minerals in global reserves. The supply of critical raw materials alone speaks volumes about China’s continuing role as a major participant in and a contributor to the development of the global semiconductor industry. It is also actively involved in cooperation and communication in the global semiconductor industry, promoting the healthy development of the industry chain.
But this does not mean that the West can impose restrictions on China’s access to semiconductor-related products and technologies on the one hand and on the other hand, demand that China keeps supplying whatever it needs. China’s efforts to safeguard its own industrial chain interests will not be hindered by such double standards and unfair treatment.
At a time when the global high-tech industrial chain has been disrupted by USled hegemonic acts, it is unreasonable and unfair for the West to expect China to maintain the West’s supply chain interests while China’s interests are being hurt.