Preface
As a global leader in the lithography machine industry, ASML plays a pivotal role in chip manufacturing. In recent years, with the rapid development of the chip industry and the continuous escalation of U.S. technology export controls to China, ASML has become the focus of wrestling with all parties.
In 2023, ASML has publicly stated that it is considering moving away from the Netherlands, sparking widespread speculation and discussion about its future direction. Various stakeholders have moved in an attempt to fight for the "belonging" of ASML. The U.S. is trying to get ASML to move to the U.S., while the Dutch government has taken a series of steps to try to keep the lithography giant. Eventually, after a lot of twists and turns, ASML made the choice: stay in the Netherlands and expand there.
This article will provide a comprehensive analysis of the underlying reasons behind ASML's decision, discuss the Dutch government's response, and the U.S. miscalculations in the process. Through this case, we can see the complexity of the geopolitical game in the field of technology, and the wisdom of small countries in dealing with the squeeze of power.
ASML moved out of the turmoil
ASML plays an important role as a leading company in the global lithography machine industry. The lithography machine is a key piece of equipment in the chip manufacturing process, and its performance level directly affects the advanced degree of the chip. ASML, on the other hand, accounts for about 90% of the global lithography machine market share and is the exclusive supplier of high-end EUV lithography machines.
It is precisely because of ASML's key position in the global chip industry chain that it has attracted attention from all parties. Especially in the context of the intensifying technology game between the United States and China, ASML has become one of the main targets of the United States to impose technology export restrictions. In 2022, the U.S. began pressuring the Netherlands to restrict ASML's exports of lithography machines to China. This undoubtedly brings uncertainty to ASML's global operations.
Against this backdrop, ASML suddenly said in early 2023 that it might consider moving its headquarters out of the Netherlands, citing talent acquisition and environmental considerations. As soon as this news came out, it immediately sparked heated discussions among all parties. On the one hand, the United States quickly expressed its desire for ASML to move to the United States and is ready to develop plans accordingly. On the other hand, the Dutch government has also moved quickly to introduce various preferential policies to retain ASML.
ASML is clearly in a dilemma. On the one hand, its key operations are increasingly affected by U.S. sanctions, forcing it to seek a new way out. But on the other hand, the Netherlands is undoubtedly the "root" of ASML, where it has a complete industrial chain and a high-quality business environment. Where to go, ASML is clearly in a dilemma.
The Dutch government's response
Faced with the risk of ASML moving out, the Dutch government quickly took a series of countermeasures. This not only reflects the importance that the Dutch government attaches to ASML, but also reflects the wisdom of small countries in dealing with the pressure of large countries.
First of all, the Dutch government has shown a high level of determination and action. On the one hand, the Dutch Prime Minister personally visited China to communicate with the Chinese government on ASML-related issues and try to find mitigation measures. On the other hand, the Dutch government quickly launched the so-called "Beethoven Plan" and allocated 2.5 billion euros to improve the infrastructure of ASML's region, including housing, education, transportation and many other areas. This undoubtedly sends a strong signal to ASML.
Secondly, the Dutch government has introduced some tangible tax cuts to further attract ASML to stay in the country. Relevant analysis points out that the Dutch government has taken the initiative to reduce ASML's tax burden, which has helped ASML alleviate cost pressure and increase its willingness to stay in the Netherlands to a certain extent.
In addition, the Dutch government has created favorable conditions for ASML in key areas such as the development of technical standards. As the world's leading lithography machine, ASML has a leading role in the development of technical standards, which helps it to have an advantage in the future competition. The Dutch government has given ASML strong support in this process, which has also strengthened ASML's confidence in staying in the local area.
Overall, the Dutch government has shown a high degree of crisis awareness and coping wisdom in the face of the risk of ASML moving out. On the one hand, through the rapid adoption of practical and effective preferential policies, ASML's demands have been greatly satisfied; On the other hand, it has created favorable conditions for ASML in key areas such as technical standards and industrial chains. This has undoubtedly greatly strengthened ASML's motivation to stay in the Netherlands.
America's miscalculation
Compared with the Dutch government's active response, the United States' performance in this incident appears to be quite passive and miscalculated.
As soon as the news that ASML was considering moving out of the Netherlands was exposed, the United States quickly expressed its hope that ASML could move to the United States and was ready to make corresponding plans. This undoubtedly reflects the high importance that the United States attaches to the status of ASML and its intention to try to use this opportunity to draw it into its camp.
However, after a series of strong measures taken by the Dutch government, ASML finally made the decision to stay in the Netherlands. This is undoubtedly a major blow to the United States. The United States originally thought that it could easily pull ASML to its side through various temptations, but it failed.
The reasons for this are that the United States' miscalculations are mainly reflected in the following aspects:
First, the U.S. underestimated ASML's roots in the Netherlands. As a global company, ASML has established a complete industrial chain and business environment in the Netherlands, where it has accumulated a wealth of talents and experience. And there are undoubtedly huge obstacles to convincing ASML to move to the United States in full.
Secondly, the United States did not fully take into account the strong will of the Dutch government. As a small country, the importance of the Netherlands to ASML is obvious, so it will not be easy to give up on this "national card" company. The Dutch Government's swift response and concrete actions demonstrate its determination to defend its national interests.
Third, the United States underestimated ASML's own strategic calculations. As a global enterprise, ASML obviously has its own development aspirations and strategic layout. Despite the pressure of US sanctions, ASML still values its roots and future prospects in the Netherlands. In contrast, moving to the U.S., while there are some preferential policies, it also means more uncertainty and constraints.
Finally, the U.S. has not fully assessed the Dutch government's response wisdom. Faced with the risk of ASML's possible move-out, the Dutch government showed a high sense of crisis and responsiveness, and they quickly adopted various preferential measures to meet ASML's demands. This is in stark contrast to the United States' reliance solely on inducements, which ultimately influenced ASML's decision-making.
Overall, the U.S. miscalculation in this matter is mainly reflected in underestimating ASML's roots in the Netherlands, ignoring the strong will of the Dutch government, and failing to accurately assess ASML's own strategic orientation and the Dutch government's response wisdom. This also fully shows that in the current context of intensifying geopolitical games, even the future direction of the technology industry often has complex political and economic factors.
epilogue
Judging by ASML's decision to stay in the Netherlands, this undoubtedly marks the end of a complex game over the pattern of technology interests. In this process, we can see several takeaways:
First of all, when small countries face pressure from major countries, they can actively respond and make full use of their own advantages to safeguard their national interests. The Dutch government's performance in this matter is worth paying attention to, and they quickly adopted various preferential policies to meet ASML's demands and give full play to the flexibility and opportunities of small countries. It also provides lessons for other small countries when they face pressure from large powers.
Second, even in the tech sector, the impact of geopolitical games cannot be ignored. ASML's decision is a good example of the complex relationship between technical, economic and political interests. All stakeholders are trying to get the most out of ASML in the process of competing for the right to speak. This undoubtedly shows that in the current fierce competition between major powers, the technology industry cannot be independent of political factors.
Finally, it also highlights the importance of self-determination. Although ASML was strongly contested by two major stakeholders, the United States and the Netherlands, in the end, it still maintained its independent decision-making ability, fully considering its own long-term interests and development aspirations. This, in turn, shows that even in the face of enormous external pressures, good companies should still insist on autonomous decision-making, rather than passively succumbing to the demands of stakeholders.
In short, ASML's final decision to stay in the Netherlands marked the end of a story with twists and turns. This process not only reflects the complexity of the current landscape of scientific and technological interests, but also leaves us with food for thought. We have reason to believe that in the future competition of science and technology, more small countries and enterprises will show similar wisdom and courage to contribute to building a fairer and more just world.