The news continues to misrepresent export control regulations as some sort of ban. As I explained in my previous post, the restrictions are merely to secure mega profits for a select few licensed exporters while kicking out their competitors. In particular, preferentially giving license to American corporations at the expense of American allies.
The “loopholes” in the restrictions are also never explained. We’re just supposed to take it face value that “cHiNa iS BreAkInG tHe RuLeZ!!1”. From my reading of the US Dept of Commerce’s official Export Administration Regulations, the only “loophole” is that exporters can apply for a license and then they can export. The continuous portrayal of China as a bad faith trade partner is a propaganda tactic to cover up their own bad faith profit driven dealings—wanting to profit from trade with China while directing the American public’s anger at China for the hollowing out of the American chip industry.
The decline of imports is subtly portrayed as a win for the cover narrative that the sanctions are presumably to slow down or stop altogether China’s access to chips. In reality, this is probably due to China building up domestic chip manufacturing—I’ll credit the article for mentioning that revenue from domestic manufacturers rose 39% in the first half of 2023 compared to a year earlier. By presenting it this way, they confuse readers into thinking that this loss (the decline of exports to China) is actually a win.
Those are some good points and I agree, but it’s important to note that the export rules doesn’t actually ban chip sales, it merely adds a requirement to get a license from the US Dept of Commerce (specifically the Bureau of Industry and Security). It would be expected that many companies American and not would start losing money since we would expect only the chosen few would be approved for the license. I think China was already planning to boost domestic chip production even before the “chip war” and the US is desperately trying to keep as much of the market for the “chosen ones” corporations before losing the market altogether.
That said, It’s kind of interesting to see just how incompetent and delusional US policymakers can be when they can’t achieve any of their stated objectives much less their ulterior objectives.
I definitely agree with your assessment of the logic behind this move.
There’s only so much you can do when you’re whole approach is ‘do as we say or else’ but the threats stop working.