Thread: When Chokepoints end up choking yourself -- How US tech dispute with China is producing layoffs in the US. ft.com/content/a75de9…
2/The US car sector is facing a major shortage of semi-conductors forcing production delays and furloughs. apnews.com/article/corona…
3/Ironically, these shortages are in part the product of US weaponization of the semi-conductor supply chain with China. reuters.com/article/us-aut…
4/In an effort to limit Chinese advances in semi-conductors the US hit the largest chip maker SMIC with export controls, limiting the ability of third parties to use their chips. news.yahoo.com/china-chip-gia…
5/This took a major producer of semi-conductors basically off line as companies avoided using their product. So supply falls. bbc.com/news/technolog…
6/At the same time, companies start to hoard chips so as to evade US sanctions. Demand rises. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
7/This supply and demand push amplifies other sector factors like continued demand for autos and rising demand for electronics. reuters.com/article/us-aut…
8/More generally, example of unanticipated consequences of weaponized interdependence. US efforts to blunt Chinese technology generates unemployment in the midwest. For more see @dandrezner, @henryfarrell, and my new edited volume at @BrookingsPressamazon.com/Uses-Abuses-We…
9/All the more reason that we need more research on the national security implications of supply chains to prevent miscalculations. Important to manage vulnerabilities but need to make sure we dont kill patient as we engage in economic surgery. foreignaffairs.com/articles/china…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/Most important, it is focused on resilience and not simple notions of reshoring. "The goal here is not pure self-sufficiency, but broad-based resilience." joebiden.com/supplychains/
3/Center to a new vision of globalization is focusing on specific threats and vulnerabilities rather than throwing the whole thing away. foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/04/thi…
Thread: Why is the UK Huawei decision such a big deal? Think weaponized interdependence. cnet.com/news/uk-gives-…
2/The US administration has given a lot of reasons to be weary of Huawei -- economic competition, intelligence sharing, national security...newstatesman.com/spotlight-amer…
3/But this misses the way in which all of these concerns are wrapped up together in a world of global economic networks that often have key choke points. See recent piece in @HarvardBiz w/@henryfarrell. hbr.org/2020/01/choke-…
Thread: What does political risk look like in a world of weaponized interdependence? @henryfarrell and I have a new piece in @HarvardBiz. Take away -- business needs to hold on to their hats. hbr.org/2020/01/choke-…
Thread: Read -- The EU and the US ended Google's tax evasion scheme. States create these kinds of loopholes and they can end them too. reuters.com/article/us-goo…
2/ As @VincentAB deftly shows, international agreements between the US and other advanced economies generated the opportunity structures for companies like Google and others to play the system. cambridge.org/core/journals/…
@VincentAB 3/In other words, this is not simply a game of structural power, where firms use the threat of exit to force down tax rates. Instead, states created a version of globalization that opened up new opportunities for global firms.
Thread: @henryfarrell and I have a new piece in @ForeignAffairs on the future of globalization. Under the banner of 'Chained Globalization', we try to think through a path forward in a world where economic and security issues are increasingly linked. foreignaffairs.com/articles/unite…
@henryfarrell@ForeignAffairs 2/In the wake of the Cold War, pundits hailed Globalization ushering in a new era of peace. Economic exchange had neutered states and made conflict illogical. While many have debunked Friedman and his vision of the flat world, the myth lingered. nytimes.com/1996/12/08/opi…
@henryfarrell@ForeignAffairs 3/This was not simply a news headline. policies like constructive engagement as well as the Washington consensus saw economic openness as a path to prosperity and peace.
Thread: US Declinists may be critical but Im sticking w/progressive foreign economic policy based on market power. Or my response to @dandrezner's response to my response to his great original piece. beta.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/0…
@dandrezner 2/Drezner is skeptical of @ewarren foreign economic policy for three key reasons and let me break them down.
@dandrezner@ewarren 3/First, he thinks it is a continuation of Trumpian protectionism and out of sync w/dem voter preferences. Here I think this uses a broad brush to cast aspersions where maybe they are not due.