The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.
As the world's largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer, Huawei has always been the center of Sino-US trade frictions, and the United States has tried to suppress Huawei through various means, however, Huawei has continued to innovate in independent research and development and industrial chain construction, successfully breaking Western monopolies and making great breakthroughs in the fields of semiconductors and communications. The United States tries to restrict the development of Chinese companies through bans and supply cuts, and even stabs in secret, which may maintain the leading position of the United States in some areas in the short term, but in the long run, this approach may harm the interests of the United States itself.
Recently, China has taken countermeasures. In March, China conducted a surprise security review of Micron Technology, which revealed that Micron products had cybersecurity risks. So far, a number of Chinese companies, including Inspur and Lenovo, have stopped purchasing Micron products. Not without reason, Micron has lobbied the U.S. government in recent years to crack down on Chinese companies, especially Yangtze River Storage. China is fully promoting the domestic chip industry chain, and cybersecurity has become a top priority.
The actions of the U.S. government and Micron seem to be somewhat self-defeating. At the critical moment when China banned the sale of Micron products, the Biden administration first stood up and said that Samsung and SK Hynix could not fill the market gap left by Micron. In addition, Micron disbanded the Shanghai memory design team last year, taking away core R&D personnel.
In addition to Micron, another American chip giant decided to fully withdraw from the Chinese market. The tech giant, Meiman Electronic Technologies, moved their R&D center from the Chinese market to Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Foreign media said that this is a manifestation of the United States' "resistance".
However, Micron and Meimeng's withdrawal is more like they can't gain a foothold in the Chinese market. Whether it is Micron's products or Meiman's technology, China has been able to achieve domestic substitution, long-term storage, Changxin storage, Huawei and so on.
It is worth mentioning that many American companies actively embrace the Chinese market. Intel and Nvidia provide custom processors to Chinese companies, Qualcomm said it will continue to supply Chinese companies, and Seagate is willing to pay a $300 million fine to supply Huawei. Even Tesla CEO Elon Musk has opposed U.S. decoupling, as evidenced by a recent trip to China.
The current global economy increasingly depends on the basic principles of openness, fairness and cooperation. The United States should be more open and work with other countries and businesses to develop together. Otherwise, the monopoly and leading position of the United States will only prompt other countries to seek breakthroughs in independent research and development and industrial chain construction, and eventually form a more decentralized industrial chain pattern, and the United States itself will also lose many opportunities and advantages.
In short, the current approach of the United States may bring some benefits in the short term, but in the long run, it may harm its own interests and undermine the global cooperative landscape. Now, let's explore this together and share your opinion! The evolution of the technology industry will continue to shape the global economy and partnerships, and we need to think together about the way forward.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or allude to any real country, political system, organization, race, individual. The above does not mean that the author of this article endorses the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising above or related to any of the above, nor does it assume any direct or indirect legal liability.