ASML CEO Says Trying to Control Chip Sales to China Won’t Work

[hist78]

Bold to disrespect the CIA like this.

What exactly do you mean?

 

[benb]

Export controls against China will not only fail to halt its technological progress but also hurt the U.S. economy, ASML Holding NV Chief Executive Officer Peter Wennink said...

“I believe that export controls are not the right way...

If American business with China on semiconductors is cut off completely, it will probably cost anywhere between $80 billion to $100 billion in sales and 125,000 jobs in the U.S., Wennink added, citing U.S. Commerce Department estimates.

Wennink said in January that ASML hasn’t shipped its latest EUV machines to China because the request for an export license is still with the Dutch government...

Peter Wennink comments are so interesting without adding in the US-China trade war stuff I decided to focus my comments on that.
His comments indicate that export controls are bad for ASML and bad for the US if the trade war escalates. Even the Commerce Department agrees with him, the costs could be 80-100B.
So, with costs that high, he must be right?
My thoughts are it would certainly be better if the trade war doesn’t escalate, and the 80-100B costs are avoided.
But I think it is simplistic to say, approve the export license for EUV or else the trade war will escalate. It is an ASML-serving view. A more balanced view would be, ASML and other global firms collectively have leverage over China, and we may want to use this leverage, although it is risky.
China is vulnerable to technological blockade according to this article: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...na-won-trump-s-good-and-easy-to-win-trade-war
The US lost the trade war; the costs were greater on the US than on China. The technological blockade may be more effective.
ASML may have a right to be repaid for their losses due to this blockade, similar to how stimulus checks are due to workers who can’t work due to government orders.
Absent such compensation, I think they have a right to complain.

 

[smeyer0028]

Physicists build machines much more complicated than
EUV exposure machines. Some examples are the
IONQ quantum computer (built from ion trap equipment)
and the old SLAC Krystrom tubes made by physicists
at Varian Labs company. Problem for physicists is
making identical machines cheaply. Although Klystroms
did have a sort of assembly line. I think China's problem
is the semi manufacturing infrastructure.

 

[cyrustabery]

Physicists build machines much more complicated than
EUV exposure machines. Some examples are the
IONQ quantum computer (built from ion trap equipment)
and the old SLAC Krystrom tubes made by physicists
at Varian Labs company. Problem for physicists is
making identical machines cheaply. Although Klystroms
did have a sort of assembly line. I think China's problem
is the semi manufacturing infrastructure.

I respectfully disagree. The lens and scanner systems for euv are more complex and precise than the slac high energy particle detectors. But both the software and the hardware to support continued scaling will be needed in China if they want to stay close to the leading edge. Both are at issue.

 

[smeyer0028]

This is obviously not my area. I was under the impression
that the precision required by cold atom physics (ion
traps) mirrors is higher than few nm fab processes.