Kopi Time E135 - Techno-nationalism with Alexander Capri

Published Oct 2, 2024, 3:49 AM

Writer and academic Alexander Capri returns to Kopi Time after nearly 5 years, but the issues we discussed then and now remain relevant, if not even more so. In this engaging chat, Alex walks us through the expanding notion of techno-nationalism, its impact on trade patterns and flows, and corporate strategies around geopolitical fragmentation. We touch upon the innovation race between China and the US, China’s digital belt-and-road strategy, and the trans-Atlantic tech alliance. We consider the implication of all this for South-East Asia, as well as India.

Welcome to Kobe Time, a podcast series on Markets and Economies from D BS Group Research. I'm Tam Rbe, chief economist. Welcoming you to our 135th episode today. We will welcome back Alexander Capri to the podcast. Alex is a writer, academic and former partner in the Asia Pacific Practice of KPMG. He has done a lot of work on global value chains, trade and geopolitics, Global tech, the digital economy and the industries of the future.

Alex has recently published a book Techno Nationalism, how it's reshaping trade, geopolitics and society. Alexander Capri, a warm welcome back to Copy time. Thank you. It's great to have you, Alex. We did this once before back in April 2020 just as we were being engulfed by the global pandemic. Alex. When I look at the transcript of that conversation, I think we kind of had it right. We talked over the push and pull factors driving the realignment of the global supply chain.

Uh We asserted barely a couple of months into the pandemic that the crisis would provide additional motivation to lean toward resiliency over efficiency. Well, those issues remain alive today, Alex, and you've written a lot rather large book on it. So let's start, how do you define techno nationalism?

Good question.

Uh II, I would say that we would throw in a few other words. Uh So let, let's start with geo economics, right? If we're thinking about supply chains, let's replace uh just in time with, just in case. Uh you know, if, if we're thinking about a purely cost driven model that seeks efficiencies and hyper rationalized supply chains, now, geo poli geopolitics and other issues stemming from great power competition

are now factoring into how a supply chain is structured. Um You know, where a manufacturing process is going to take place, how a strategic partner is chosen. Um So, so I I would break down techno nationalism into six very distinct elements.

Um The first is uh supply chains. So supply chain weaponization, governments looking to control or stem the flow of technology to perceived adversaries and that happens through things like export controls, ah the imposition of sanctions. Um Then I would, I would break it down into uh decoupling and Deris. And if decoupling and deris is happening, then we're looking at reshoring near shoring friend, shoring

uh from, from a sort of a G to G basis. Um And even a G to B basis. We're looking at government driven innovation, industrial policy if you will. Uh we're also looking at um an increase in basically, frankly, you know, hybrid warfare, right? We're looking at espionage. We're looking at uh elevation of cyber intrusions, that sort of thing.

And then the final element would be uh basically what we call tech uh diplomacy, right? So governments working with other governments and working with businesses to forge these new strategic alliances around strategic technologies.

Why is it just not nationalism? Why is it techno nationalism?

Because uh technology is a power multiplier. And so if we put this in the context of a a nation, a nation state uh technology, I, if we're putting this in the terms of techno nationalism ah is about the linkage between the technological prowess of a particular country or organizations within that country

and their ability to project national security and, and, and defense related uh power, uh the linkage to economic strength, prosperity. And then finally, really, there's a third element which is societal and that is uh you know, as technology becomes uh essential to controlling narratives, to releasing information or disinformation

uh towards uh in, in uh authoritarian regimes, towards uh suppression of populations, censorship that, that sort of thing. Technology is central to all of that. And so all of these would be power multipliers.

Is this a brand new thing that basically goes back to Donald Trump, becoming the president of the United States or it's been going on for long before that,

as long as there as there have been nation states, there has been techno nationalism.

Ah So, for example, in the book I talk about the founding of the United States. Uh Alexander Hamilton, first Secretary of the Treasury, really one of his top priorities, if not, the top priority was to get access to British technology when it, when it came to the, you know, textile milling machines and, and, and so on. So, um

and there were adversaries at that time, so you basically had to steal it

and that's precisely what happened. I mean, that was really item number one on the agenda was, you know, steal, acquire, figure out how to get access to technology. So, um that sort of if you want to, let's just stick with the term techno nationalist uh approach to, to real politik and, and, and international relations, ah has been around for a very long time.

It's fascinating and I think going back to the Cold War era, some would argue that some of the decoupling that happened between the US and Russia put Russia under a lot of economic strike because they had to sort of create homegrown tech stack, which was never really good. Enough incentives were not aligned. And that was one of the key elements that drove the victory if you will, the Cold War in favor of the West over the

Soviet bloc.

Yeah, I mean, that's a, that's a widely held view. Um I, I certainly, I, I certainly would, would say that um the amount of, of resources that, that, that needs to go into uh you know, pushing the, the envelope if you will from a technological standpoint and the, the idea that um the, for example, the, the Star Wars system that the Reagan administration uh was pushing whether or not it was e even feasible.

Uh you know, the, the theory is, is, is that it bankrupted the, the Soviets because they thought it was, and they were putting a lot of, you know, time and effort and money into it. And, and of course, you know, they, they it, it helped in the collapse. So, um

but from a techno nationalist standpoint, uh if you look at really, if you go back 100 years, uh and let's go back to the first World War, right? I mean, there were chemistry wars, right? To figure out how to, how to produce nitrates, to produce uh explosives, for example, right? And that, that was really the war of the scientists, right to come up with those innovations. And if you trace this theme of techno nationalism really back the last 100 years plus, um

there really is this very important correlation between the industrial revolutions

and uh and what what I call the technology feedback loop, which is essentially this virtuous cycle that exists between um you know, governments, national governments, the defense establishment, academia,

private business and or markets. Uh and as they all work together, uh you have this phenomenon where you have innovation taking place, uh it's, it's generating profit, it's generating more innovation, which it becomes a network effect sort of thing. So if you, if, if you look at this, this view of the world that some have described as, um the west versus the rest,

uh you know, going back really 3, 400 years. Uh I mean, we could trace this all the way back to the Dutch East India company, right. And that, that sort of symbiotic relationship that emerged between the state and a for profit organization and all those elements in the feedback loop, right? But if you, if you project forward um

that has combined with the, now we're in the fourth industrial revolution. But when you, when you, when you look at the fortuitous results of the industrial revolutions, the technology feedback loop

uh on a nation state level that has essentially laid the, laid the groundwork for the international system as we see it today,

right? Uh Alex, I want to get one thing clear, which is when you are referring to techno nationalism and especially when I think about the totality of the measures that particularly the US has taken against China in the last decade or so. A lot of it is

rationalize under the guise of national security. We don't want our data to fall into the wrong hands. We don't want our technology to be weaponized in an armed conflict or something like that by our adversaries. But it seems to me that you, when you take this big historical sweep,

you're also putting it in the context of economic security. I don't want you to rise to my level of economic prosperity and I would sort of prevent you from rising to some extent. Yeah,

I, I

think that's, that's somewhat of a zero sum view. Right? And, and I actually don't think that, that techno nationalism puts us in a world of zero sum. Right? I think the world has become way too complex right now, too many overlapping interests. And, and we're actually in a paradox. So the paradox is this,

if you look at the, if you look at the grand sort of the mega trends that are defining the international system today, right? Um you know, you look at

uh the fragmentation of a global supply chains because of geopolitical pressures, right? This move towards regionalization, even localization. Um the the the the idea that uh the world is bifurcating, right um around these, these two nodes, right? That basically the GSG G7 US plus plus China, I mean, if if you look at that, um

we're not de globalizing, this is not a de globalization process, this is a reorganization process. So the global economy is, is reorganizing itself and it's, it's, it's a correction if you will. Um III I actually refer to it um as a geopolitical version of creative destruction. All right. So

there, there is a, there there are many new economic opportunities that are rising as, you know, as a banker. Uh and the work that, that the bank is doing, you know, that, that, that when you have these shifts in supply chains in, in global value chains, um

there's rebuilding, there's restructuring, there's, there's the services industry, you know, there, there's, it's, it's a real knock on effect. And I should point out the paradox that I that I refer to is that on one hand, we have all of these things that I've just described happening with strategic technologies. So, so the value chains around there's really 12 core technologies and we can get back into that in a little bit of course, semiconductors, quantum biotech, you know that sort of thing. Um

But even as that's happening, even even as we're seeing this bifurcation, we're seeing increases in trade volumes including between the US and China, right? So um

the way I look at that, the way I dissect that is I look at global value chains as a, as a sort of a striation like three levels. OK. So on the top level, we have all the strategic goods, right? And that's where that's where the decoupling and the deris is happening, the restructuring and so forth in the middle, the second, the second layer down, we have this nebulous gray area.

And uh within that gray area, we have uh dual use goods. So these are commercial goods that are used for a wide array of industries and sectors, you know, everything from a SIM card in your phone, literally to the brake pads in the car you're driving. But they could be considered dual use, meaning they're commercial, but they could be used for military purposes. And therefore, if they're being sent

to um you know, an identified entity, a blacklisted entity somewhere, it's going to require an export license or it's just gonna be blocked throughout, that's the real gray area. And that's really where the scenario mapping and the the the really serious analysis has to take place if you're a company

and then the and then the third level is just the the rest of the stuff. Uh that is essentially innocuous, right? I mean, do we care where your shoes come from? You know, your bottle of shampoo, you know, that type of thing.

But even that evolves Alex, I'll give you an example five years ago. If you bought an Osim massage chair, it'd give you a massage. Today's Osim chairs have Bluetooth capability and you can connect to your phone and you can run the chair through your phone. So all of a sudden now it has

mini Bluetooth application and data transmission capabilities. So then it starts going on from the third, completely innocuous. A chair that does no harm. That's right to somewhere in the middle. I guess that's where lawyers and regulators and consultants. Everybody come in and they fight it out to the company gets a buy or not.

That's right.

And so if you take, uh if you take a dual use technology that's in a, a fairly ubiquitous kind of product that everybody buys. And then there's this uh a sudden geopolitical event, uh an accidental flare up in the South China Sea or some kind of an event. It's quite possible that literally overnight,

ah what was a commercial, what was considered purely a commercial good going to a particular importer or buyer in say China um is now off limits,

right? And so, I mean, these are the types of things that companies need to be uh mapping out, right? They need to be looking at what parts of their supply chain are in this gray dual use area and given different scenarios in the world, what would happen if you know, scenario one, scenario two, perfect example of that is um electric vehicles

and all of the, you know, w what is an electric vehicle, right? It's, it's, it's a computer on wheels, right? And it's, it's, it's sending and receiving information not only about where you're going but everything that's around you. Uh what's coming in on communication networks and other smart devices. And as you saw, I think it was just yesterday that Washington has announced that both the software and the hardware that goes into electric vehicles in the states cannot be of Chinese origin,

right? So no export and no import around those things.

Yeah, so

that's an example of how in anything that's considered strategic, we're going, we're going to continue to see a very clear bifurcation of supply chains, value chains.

Uh Maybe this question is too early to ask. But since you were talking about it, it sort of follows to me almost naturally do these restrictions work.

You know, a semiconductor is super tiny, a lot of stuff just are uploaded and transmitted through the cloud over the air. It's not a question of a Department of Commerce inspectors sitting in Vietnam or somewhere else and making sure that everything is up and up.

Um What has, what is the report card so far?

Well, look export controls, le le let's start historically, I'll, I'll, I'll give you the answer historically and then, and then maybe we can apply it to say semiconductor today, right? What's what's going on? So historically,

the record shows that um an export control will slow down the transmission or the, you know, the, the the dissemination of a certain kind of technology, but it's not going to stop it eventually. Um You know, it's, it's going to make its way into sort of the, the, the broader environment. Now,

we also have to be careful about what kinds of technology we're talking about. So if we're talking about satellite technology, which in the, in the eighties, you know, the eighties and nineties there were controls, but eventually everybody figured out how to make satellites. Um That's one thing. But if we're talking about making a two nanometer chip

where the barriers to entry are so incredibly

high,

basically one company makes it or

or you know, it's it's right. So in the case of one company, you're probably talking about a SML which which makes the lithography lithography equipment.

But even beyond that, within that, within that value chain, within that fabrication process, the the hyper specialization and the companies that specialize in that. So it's it's essentially with, in that case, we're we're looking at the emergence of a cartel, right. We're looking at the emergence of a chip cartel along geopolitical lines, right? So to answer the question, do do export controls work.

Uh it's two fold, it depends how sophisticated the technology is and, and how, how high the barriers to entry are. But it also um it it also comes down to um how can these export controls be circumvented? What are the workarounds? What are the back doors and to that effect, there are quite a few, right? So let's let's talk about NVIDIA, nvidia's A I chips, right?

So ex you know, export controls on them. Are they continuing to make their way into China, for example? And the answer is yes um uh you know, are ex and how, how is that happening? There's there's a few ways that's happening. The first is the export control process itself

and the way it works is before an export control is actually enforced and it becomes mandatory to get a license. There's this long period where they make an announcement where they say yes, we're uh you know, it's a public, it's a public announcement process. We're, we're going to uh be implementing export controls and it's going to take effect in such and such time. So what does that do?

Uh that incites a AAA binge buying sessions, right. So to load all the purchases as much as possible, I mean, just soak up everything that's out on the market, stockpile it and you've got chips for the next two years. That's what Huawei did when they were placed on the entity list, the the the Chinese telecommunications equipment manufacturing company. Um

So there's, there's that, so there's the, the issue that everybody goes out in stockpiles. And we're seeing that now with uh DUV uh deep ultraviolet lithography machines uh being stockpiled. Uh you know, in China, right? The huge, huge, you know, spikes in, in, in the numbers going up because

the EU vs are not available at all. The

EU vs which is the extreme ultraviolet. Uh But the Duvs um um are are being basically purchased because

um you know, just to divert a little bit. Um So, so Huawei worked with SMIC uh and they came up with a seven nanometer chip using uh imported DUV equipment. Basically, they used that for the, the, the mate 60 phone which was

not considered likely, but they pull it off,

they, they pulled it off. But again, if you look, I mean, uh I'm kind of detracting but

uh I'll come back to the, you know, do the, do export controls work. Um But yeah, so in the case of Huawei, what they did with the, with, with that, with that process is it's a, it's a, it's a much more labor intensive process. You know, when you're in the lithography process, you have to pass over again and again and again,

yield, you get a lot of commercial,

it costs a lot more money. So unless somebody's basically, you know, reimbursing you for all that, that leakage, that cost leakage, it's not competitive, basically. OK. So, so coming back, so we got binge buying

uh which is happening. Um the other is, of course, is just black market and gray market, you know, achieving chips uh you know, on the black market and the other uh and this is why this is a game of whack a mole, right? When we talk about um the US administration trying to, trying to enforce um

uh but you know, the the other is when, when we're talking about uh cloud computing, for example, and and accessing the power of those chips to to do whatever computer processing you want, you can access that in the cloud from a third

party.

So the data center can be in the Middle East, the company could be in China, right? I mean, right, they're accessing all the cutting edge chips being used over there.

So, so this is, this is a a game that's in progress.

And uh you know, we're going to continue to see, you know, efforts to sort of uh clamp down on these types of, of things. And I think maybe maybe another time we can come back and talk about what I call the surveillance supply chain. Basically, the the way new technologies are going to be used to essentially achieve much, much greater transparency and traceability in supply chains, right, to trace the actual movement.

Uh And a lot of this is gonna be focused on A I right on, on A I chips and it's gonna be focused on cloud infrastructure. You mentioned uh data centers. This is where all this is going to be playing out. So it's

not just a question of I buy something from you and then I do whatever I want with it.

In fact, even after buying it from you, I remain liable to how I use it

or, or even the the original seller will be able to trace where it actually is including embedded in a finished product basically. So I think we'll see more of that and that is that's going to be a growth industry, think about the amount of money that's gonna be made just around the compliance like the reg tech that's gonna go into that and that's gonna be big

rec tech huh so many different techs out there. Um

You know, we began this discussion in a very general term. We said techno nationalism define it. I don't think you even mentioned the US initially. When you responded to my question, you definitely did not touch on China, but we have naturally veered toward the US China dynamic because let's be clear that is the big story behind techno nationalism. Um I want you to talk to me about something that you devote quite a bit of space in your book, which is the Digital Belt and Road by China.

Yeah, so, so you know, yes, absolutely. This is all about great power competition us China. Um you know, the Belt in the Road, the original Belt and Road, of course, is a, you know, it's a ma major Chinese initiative to essentially connect China to the rest of the world through massive infrastructure projects, ports, rail, et cetera, roads, roads and and so on.

Uh And that of course, is beneficial because a it connects the Chinese economy to the rest of the world. It allows for frankly a lot of excess capacity from steel companies and all kinds of other things in China to actually go out and build these big projects and so forth. But those who have gotten very expensive and, and as you know, uh as a banker and you're following these things, there are a lot of um countries that are on the verge of defaulting,

uh they can't pay back the money that the Chinese lent them and so forth. And then we've had this, this, this, this, this notion of, you know, debt diplomacy and that sort of thing. So in a geopolitical and techno nationalist context, um so China has, has uh really turned its focus along the Belt and Road to building digital infrastructure. It's not as expensive, but at the same time, you, you get more bang for your Renminbi, right? And, and, and that is because if you have

uh Chinese companies like Huawei and, and you have, you know, Alibaba cloud and, and, and you know, Tencent and all these other companies building the digital infrastructure, you have sense time, the the big A I uh software makers hike vision, the the uh the the uh the camera surveillance technology, facial recognition, you have um Baidu, the the the Chinese uh satellite network. So you have this ecosystem of Chinese companies

that are building this digital infrastructure and then you overlay on top of that uh Beijing's um you know, Beijing's efforts to, to roll out its digital currency for and, and of course, this is all part of the de dollarization efforts. Uh you know that they've been involved with, with other BRICS countries and also with, you know, their client states along the Belt and the Road, this becomes a, a very, very

um compelling and very attractive uh formula if you will for extending influence economic influence and, and you know, ee extending as, as sort of the duality of that is it, you know, it doubles as a, as a, as a force multiplier and projector.

I just

want to ss before I want to talk about the digital currency part in a moment, but I just want to stay with the digital infrastructure part a little longer. Um When we talk about this

digital stack, if you will coming from the various Chinese ah providers of technology, is it ubiquitous? Is it interoperable? So, could I have Cisco routers in my country? And routers made by I don't know Huawei or something and they can all talk to each other or Cisco routers will have a problem dealing with

interoperability with Chinese technology.

Well, that's a, that's a great question. So, so the currently the way things stand, you know, you have very few players building this kind of technology. Um There, there have been many efforts through the, the O A uh network which is essentially efforts to basically open source. A lot of the technologies that go into the whole value chain around five G wireless. And the the rationale behind that is

you don't just have Ericsson and Nokia and Qualcomm and, and, and, and Huawei basically, uh so

as it stands now, if you have one big provider, it's a lot more complicated, right? It's, and, and it's very difficult to get these companies to work together. Basically, it's almost impossible, basically. Right? Um So um

the i the answer is it works better. And certainly if we're talking about the Digital Belt and Road, and we're talking about, you know, um China's China's view and China's strategy, it's, it's about having a, a fully Chinese ecosystem.

I heard this uh onion analogy from an executive recently where they said that if you have core infrastructure that is very security sensitive of an organization, you tend to still stay very Western with respect to buying those technologies and capabilities. But if there are outer layers of that company's infrastructure, you're OK, buying something rather ubiquitous, which doesn't have that much of a tech related sensitivity.

But it does come with very large scale from the Chinese and it's very reasonably priced and it does make commercial sense to have the outer layers, having some degree of Chinese layering, but not the inner

layers.

And, and that's an ongoing debate and it's a very contentious debate that is taking place in European countries in particular, right? Where um you know, the the consensus is moving though uh to the point to where nobody wants potentially adversarial

uh technology in the core of their networks anywhere uh to, you know, uh on if you peel, you know, if you have, if you leave the outer layers of the onion out there, um there's there's now increasing debate as to who should be, who should be providing that kind of technology. So

um that

is out

and, and, but that's where the tech diplomacy takes place, right? That's where governments, you know, they have, they, they deal with pressure from in Washington, in particular, if we're talking about Huawei.

Ok. So now let's come to the digital currency aspect. So you see there being two sides of the same coin, the digital infrastructure diplomacy and then using the digital currency as

a compliment uh additional offering if you will from the Chinese.

Well, the the the the issue with, with digital money uh or in particularly uh central bank backed digital currencies, right? As, as, as they become, as they sort of are rolled out if you will. Um is you're, you're dealing with um a central bank of a of a sovereign state, basically that is overseeing uh this particular currency. So

uh the question then becomes, is this a democratic state that uh adheres to specific kinds of values, privacy values? How do you know how to use, how you know what, what can be done once somebody's data is harvested to what may it be linked and applied? Can it be applied to some kind of a social credit system essentially? Right? Because our our commercial daily activities

uh that's our lifeblood, right? And if, if, if you know if, if we can't buy a cup of coffee or if we can't buy a train ticket because we've got a low social credit score, right? You know, that is that's, that, that's a problem. Right. And certainly from a, from a liberal democratic value standpoint, that's a problem. Right. So,

so I think we're, when, when we look at different systems where we have a potential um

Chinese hegemony, uh digital money hegemony, particularly around uh around the Belt and Road, some of the countries in the Belt and Road. Um that's a, that's a, that's a train, that's a head, head on train crash, right? Uh With, with, with Western values when it comes to what kind of money is used and how it's used and how that data is used, right?

But there's so many countries in the world which run large trade deficits vis A vis China

and

add to that the dynamic of weaponization of the US dollar seizing the central bank assets of Afghanistan of Russia.

I would think that there would be actually increased motivation for countries that have pretty deep trade relationship with China and are a bit spooked by what the US has done in recent years to reduce their reliance on the US

dollar.

I totally agree. I, I think we're going to see, I mean, we're seeing efforts and we're seeing a lot of enthusiasm around de dollarization, right? And uh so I, I think I, I, well, the green back is going to be,

ah, a very powerful reserve currency for decades to come, but there clearly is an impetus right? There clearly is, is a very conscious effort to move away. And in the process of doing that,

uh the rise of digital currencies bring, you know, bring with them all kinds of issues,

right?

So

the

funny thing, Alex is that while we're discussing this in the context of frontier technology,

the biggest beneficiary of this motivation to de dollarization is actually an old asset, which is gold. That's the thing that has rallied in the last couple of years, unlike any other things. Whereas you know, cryptos they go up and down CBD CS, the things that we you and I are talking about is still a work in progress. We're not sure whether the Chinese or any other country would really be enthusiastically replacing their paper currency with digital currency, but the potential is certainly there.

Um OK, so that takes me to the transatlantic alliance, you mentioned earlier that Europe and both at the government and corporate level, there is some degree of, you know, rethinking about how to engage with China on the US. We've seen it already pretty clear there is no daylight between the Democrats and Republicans. Everybody is becoming pretty antagonistic to Chinese technology. So how are the Europeans thinking? How are the Americans thinking in terms of their collaboration?

Yeah, so there there are different views on this, right? So the the the diehard neo li uh you know, basically look at all of these, these big initiatives like the Chips and Science Act, you know, the chips for America Act, which are big subsidies for um the semiconductor sector to reso or bring back fabrication to the United States government subsidized. Uh They look at things like that, they look at things like the um

the uh the Ira Act, right? Which is, which is the, the Inflation Reduction Act, which has a lot of buyer and it has a lot of subsidies and sweeteners for companies to, to, to move things home and, and, and, and, and, and, and do production that otherwise they may have offshored somewhere else.

So the neo, the, the neo liberal argument says, look, this is a race to the bottom, right? Because it's not just the US that is offering these kinds of subsidies. But now, of course, then the Europeans have to respond and like, and the South Koreans have to do the same thing. And all of the, you know, all of these regions are in fact putting up big, big amounts of money, particularly for semiconductors. But I would say that that it's not a race to the bottom and that, and we have not seen that. Yes, there have been European companies that have gone to the US,

but there are us companies that are still looking to invest in Europe, right? We look at Intel, for example, you know, Intel is a little bit stalled in some of their efforts, but nonetheless, uh they'll get on track, right. They, you know, to do a lot of a lot more research and development and actually fabrication in in Europe. And they, and they will avail themselves of European money basically. So, so I think

that will happen. Um now

there, there, there's no doubt that that as we see this reconfiguration, this restructuring around strategic supply chains, that more and more innovation and more and more investment is concentrating in these different nodes that otherwise may have been spread out a little bit more, you know, in a much more open trading, less geo economic paradigm.

Um So in that respect,

um certainly developing countries that may have had, you know, may have been playing a bigger role in global value chains, they're losing out that, that, that clearly is happening. Um So the, so the renaissance, if you will uh the the technology and the innovation renaissance, which is happening because of the public, private partnerships that are being so well funded in these nodes, right? That's happening.

And yes, there is going to be there is going to be economic opportunity in those places, but it's going to be a lot more uneven,

right? But is there alignment full alignment between the Americans and the Europeans on how to deal with China? No,

no.

Has the alignment improved in the last 3.5 years under Biden? I I

think uh I think you have to go country by country in Europe, right? The Germans are really struggling, right? They're really divided because they've had just a core, small group of companies that have invested very, very heavily right in, in, in China. Right. Siemens and the auto, the big automotive companies,

their, their global sales come from China. Yeah, that's right. BMW s of

the world. Exactly. Exactly. They bet big right. Under Chancellor Merkel. Um, they really bet big on China and, and, but then if you look at sort of the middle tier companies in Germany and you look at, you know, uh the labor, you know, the the labor pool there, um they want,

they want jobs to come back to Germany, they want more investment to, you know, to, to sort of gravitate in the tech sector uh to, to Germany. So that Germany is one example. Um So again, I think I mentioned early on there is no way to analyze this whole situation through a zero sum uh you know, kind of lens, right? It's, there's just, there's so many different overlapping interests, some peop some lose some win.

Uh There's a great deal of, of uncertainty, but I think in general, I think in general the transatlantic um relationship, of course, we have some elections coming up here, right? Just a few. Just yes. So we have a big presidential election coming up. Uh You know, III I would say this uh I think uh uh a Trump two term I think would, would put much more strain on the transatlantic relationship. Of course, because of his tariff plans and so forth

than a Harris uh administration. But having said that there still are too many uh uh mutual interests across the Atlantic. Uh you know, uh interests around A I standards, basically rule frameworks around tech interests to, to cooper on supply chain resilience around critical minerals, rare earths uh

uh incentives. I think uh I mentioned this a around semiconductors. Uh I think there are incentives uh around, you know, things like lithium batteries and, and electric vehicles and so forth. So I think there are, there still are quite a few incentives and then of course, there's the NATO angle and the security angle when it comes to Ukraine.

Um So II, I think, I think the transatlantic relationship will, will be just fine.

I want to stay on that for a second because you made a, you know, great premise, which is that we should look at country by country. The European Union is not a single entity. There are countries, especially on the eastern side of the European Union, which are very friendly to China and then there are others who are not. Um So is there a risk that eu itself could fracture as a result of the US China conflict?

Um There's always a risk that, you know, when you have a uh a union or certainly a customs union that big uh when, when you have a block of countries that big. Yes. Uh There's always a risk of that. And, and I totally agree. I mean, I think, you know, if you look at the eastern eastern European countries, they're very eager to absorb investments, you know, from China, they're very eager for infrastructure. Um uh But at the end of the day,

I think there is a tipping point uh even in eastern Europe, when uh the view becomes that, that any outside power, China or anybody else, in this case, of course, it's China is overstepping its bounds when it comes to trying to exert influence. And we've seen that we've seen that over the last decade, particularly during the COVID crisis, right. So uh even that uh I think we, you know, we will, we will, we will continue to see,

you know, if I had to make a prediction of, you know, what the global economy is going to look like from a supply chain standpoint over the next decade, I would say that

what is deemed desking today uh with from strategic Chinese or single source kind of Chinese supply chains that DERIS is going to slowly evolve into decoupling

essentially. And we'll just see those supply chains basically coalesce,

you know, under different in different regions.

I'm curious to see what happens to the EV supply chain. If Chinese companies invest in Hungary and Poland and Turkey and starts making B DS and other cars, they should be credible within Europe under eu rules of origin

and they should be classified as made in Europe cars. But clearly in the context of U MC, the Americans have said they are not going to accept that, that even if we already make something in Mexico, it will be considered a made in China car. So I can sort of think about this alignment that if you are more open to investment in the EU than the US is within the U MC A.

Uh how do these things?

Yeah, I mean, look there uh this is just playing out. Now, now, one thing I would say about um sort of the, the, the the the movement of, of, in this case, Chinese electric vehicle assembly, uh manufacturing, you know, out of China into, into the European Union.

Um what is still going to be a very contentious issue, there is going to be the fact that they may be assembling the cars there. But if all the parts and components are also still coming from China, then I think we're going to run into issues around local content requirements and we're already hearing about that, right? So, you know, if you look at uh if you look at a typical uh free trade agreement that in that involves automotive, um they're usually pretty high

local content requirements or even local labor, uh you know, the US MC A which is the, you know, us, Canada Mexico replacement of what was used with NAFTA. Um I mean, they've, they've, they've got in very, very high, um you know, local origin content, uh requirements that even include, you know, you know, proving that uh that, that labor was paid a certain wage. Right. So I, I think

you, you might call it a non tariff barrier if you want. You know, technically, but II, I think

no matter what happens in eastern Europe, as long as it's part of the, the union, um there's going to be pretty strong push back uh about about moving uh you know Chinese uh

Chinese cars into that into that

region,

right? So there is like general assembly, there is full kit assembly and there is manufacturing. I'm learning about this because I'm thinking about phone Apple phones being made in India or assembled in India debate. Uh And and I'm sure for the EV same thing comes up. Uh Alex, I want to talk about substation in India momentarily, but just a couple of words on this race for innovation.

So chips, for example, the US remains the undisputed leader in the world in chip design, East Asia is the undisputed leader in the world in chip manufacturing. But the design which is the highest value added comes from the US. The best innovation on the chip side come from the US

Europe has pockets of excellence. You talked about a SML earlier. A SML itself is a function of a bunch of other excellent companies, you know, Carl Zeiss Lens and Siemens Laser. All going into the capabilities that A SML develops. Um We don't hear as much about cutting edge innovation coming out of China in green transition. Some uh and to your point earlier that

buying up lots of dvs and then making up to seven nanometers perhaps in five can be done by the Chinese at a low year nonetheless. But has this, this entire trade tech war led to widening of the tech gap between the US and Chinese already?

Uh Well, let's let's stick with the semiconductor uh discussion, right? I think it's good. So I, I think when you talk about semiconductors, you really have to be careful to make that distinction between advanced semiconductors and sort of

for lack of a better term, we'll call it legacy.

So leading versus lagging

edge versus lagging edge and some people don't like the term lagging edge, especially, you know, big, even big Western companies that are making so called lagging edge. So, but um so I think that's a really important distinction. Um So if, if we're talking about um China or anyone else being anywhere near what a SML can do when it comes to extreme ultraviolet,

a decade, two decades, maybe never, right? Because you know, this is not a, this is not a stationary target, this is, you know, Moore's law is still alive, right? Uh uh And, and so it's just so incredibly complex and hard and you need to have the right partners. It's that ecosystem, right? And if you can't get that full ecosystem,

it's almost an impossibility. But if we're talking about trailing edge, um then, then I think China uh is uh uh already a player and is going to be a much, much bigger player in terms of global supply. Uh And if you think about it,

um the innovation that you talked about, there is a lot of innovation taking place in China. There's no question about it. So

you don't have

to have leading edge processors to do innovation.

Not

at all, not at all. I mean, you need it for leading edge A I, right? So if you want to do machine learning and like large language models and that sort of thing, you need to have cutting edge A I, right? And you need cutting edge A I but, but for even relatively sophisticated weapons systems,

uh for almost all consumer electronics, you don't need leading edge, right? I mean, and so Apple, you know, the, the, you know, a as it pushes the, the, the, the the boundaries with its iphone, uh a Tesla, for example, you know, you, I guess you can put in more and more advanced technology because it's a computer on wheels, right? Depending on what you want it to do other than just drive around. But um but, but you know, if you look at,

if you look at medicine, uh you know, he medicine and health care, if you look at basic communications. If you look at most consumer electronics, most of that, there's a huge market for lagging edge tips.

And I think the lighting it chips are also a pretty important component of the entire green transition wave that we're seeing. So building smart wind turbines, building new age solar cells. Again, you don't need three nanometer chips for them, but you can have tremendous value addition and sources of jobs and profitability and market share just through pushing that that line of technology. Um

in terms of Southeast Asia, you know, that our mutual friend Charlie Ormiston and I, we worked on a project together with a bunch of analysts from D BS and Bain and company. Uh and we wrote a report on Southeast Asia's outlook.

So I want to hear your view on subs Asia as you know, we feel that the techno nationalism will have some winners and losers to your point earlier. And we can we see this region being a winner? Do you see that as an unqualified argument or do you think that there are some ifs and buts around

that?

II, I would agree and I thought it was a good report, of course. And I went to the presentation, I did listen to your presentation.

Yes, I, I would absolutely agree with it because of course, Southeast Asia is a very uneven economic landscape right there. You know, you've got the, the original four right countries, Singapore, of course, you know, being right at the top. Um so it will be uneven. So if you look at uh in the electronic sector, for example, um you know, where they're uh interestingly enough as these uh these as supply chains um

move or, you know, derisk or decouple out of China, you know, they're going to, of course, Vietnam, right, they're going to Malaysia, some of it's coming to Singapore uh and so

on,

surprising amount coming to Singapore. So

not so surprising. Uh, you know, III I think Singapore certainly, um

you know, provides a good environment uh for some of the high end, you know, certainly memory chips and sort of expanding the, the, the chip, the chip sector. Although that's a very, uh that's a, that's a very discreet topic here, right? Uh Nobody wants to really admit that that, you know, a lot of that is coming to Singapore because nobody wants to really offend

the Chinese in particular, but the

country remains one of the major players in lagging edge, manufacturing and exports.

That's,

that's exactly right. So I think there's gonna be more activity there, certainly around A I, that's a big part of Singapore's uh future, right? They're, they're, they're, they're hedging or they're, they're betting I should say big on, on being a player in that regard. Um Yeah, so I, I think I, I think

the necessity to, um to derisk Taiwan from a chip perspective where you have literally one company, one company making 90% of the world's most advanced chips as a subcontractor and 60% of all of the world's chips. I mean, that's just not, that's just simply not sustainable, right? That just can't be.

So we can talk about Apple, we can talk about.

But Maiden Taiwan made by TS MC, made by

TS MC, I mean, that's, you know, so, so the tech diplomacy that I mentioned earlier is about, you know, getting them to build plants, not just in Arizona, but in Germany and other parts of the world. And I think

um the uh from the the lagging edge side, uh we'll see more and more of that again, being restored uh again within II I hate this term friend shoring, right? But e essentially what it means is a much more reliable uh partnership, right? Um So, uh but so, so Southeast Asia, I think it's, it's gonna be very uneven from a, from a, from a tech standpoint. Um And then

I know you want to talk about this. Um You know, is there a linkage to India? Right? Is there, is there a corridor that links Southeast Asia more to India, right? When it comes to again, trailing edge chips and there, I think uh Malaysia is a very interesting country and I think if there is um if, if India is gonna have competition, if India is able to pursue its hopes and dreams of establishing a, a trailing edge,

uh sort of manufacturing base and they, there's activity going on in that area. I think Malaysia is going to give them a run for their money. Alex.

I'm really surprised by the developments out of Malaysia. I think when we started writing our Southeast Asia report at the beginning of this year,

I wasn't that seriously taking Malaysia's prospects. I have changed my mind dramatically over the last 89 months. And in my recent trip to Kuala Lumpur also reinforced that view that you actually have now interregional competition within Malaysia from Penang to Cyberjaya to Johor. They are all

competing for the tech dollars and you have now the Western companies, the Chinese companies and the Indians, everybody is sort of flocking to Malaysia for the know how for their abandoned land and water and electricity. It seemed like a very fertile ground for data centers and fabs. And I thought that this was going to be for the Vietnam and Indonesia to pick. But I think Malaysia is going to be a very formidable player in this area.

Absolutely.

Now, we do have another development uh happening across Southeast Asia, which is, which is a sort of a, an extension of the original uh you know, export control uh environment. Uh and that is that as many Chinese companies pick up and move right to, to circumvent export controls, et cetera or to, you know, to, to, to get out from under that, that that umbrella if you will

um you know that that's been placed over them by uh by the Department of Commerce and the US Bureau of Industry and Security which enforces export controls.

A lot of the, a lot of that um supply chain activity that was in China is just picking up and moving

to Southeast Asia. So the question then becomes um do the export controls and the licensing requirements simply follow them, right? Does, does Washington turn around and say, oh, ok. So you've relocated, you know, uh a factory from, from China to Vietnam. Uh It's, it's basically a transshipment exercise, right? Or it's, it's, it's like we were discussing with Eastern Europe. Um Now we're going to start, you know, imposing once again,

you know, security requirements coming out of Vietnam or coming out of Malaysia or even Singapore.

I understand this is already happening. It's already happening even during the Trump years. And certainly during the Biden years, we've had Department of Commerce officials go repeatedly to Vietnam precisely to investigate issues like that.

But you know, it's challenging. Um I don't think anybody moves one for one, a company from country to Country B. There is always some implement creation, some value creation in country B. So then it becomes a question of gradation, the gray area that you are talking about, right? What percent of value added from China is acceptable? Is it zero? Is it 10? Is it 20? And then how much, you know, forensic investigation do you have to do with the paperwork and the actual hardware to ascertain those claims?

Absolutely.

So, the, so, you know, this is an absolute bonanza, right? For the consulting firms, lawyers. Uh, you know,

as you said,

tech, I mean, this is a great time to be, uh, you know, a big four or mckenzie or, you know, um,

stuff that you did in your previous life,

stuff

that I did in my previous, I'm wondering if I should go back. Uh But yeah, definitely.

Um finally, uh we just touched on India, let's talk a little more about India because India has also been pursuing what is known as making in India

for the last decade or so. And India has ruled out what is known as production link and send a PL scheme and not small a chain. I mean, we're talking about 20 something odd billion dollars worth of pl have been offered. It hasn't been taken up 100% but some, some has been and there are large Indian conglomerates who are now joining the fray in raising capital to build fabs in India.

Is it a worthy goal to create a big manufacturing footprint when you have a hyper competitor like China, when you have Southeast Asia, just around the corner, should all countries that are large enough, try to build their own supply chain for certain levels of technology?

Yeah, so I think so, India is such a unique case. I mean, India has not had great success with industrial policy in the past.

It's always the same, same reasons. Right. It's, it's, it's, it's, uh, you know, too many taxes, it's over regulation, it's bad infrastructure, it's corruption, it's, you know, a lot of things that are big, you know, that are big challenges. So the question is now, you know, can India move from what it's doing now? Well, which is basically R and D and engineering centers that, you know, you know, companies have set up,

uh it does software very well. It's got a lot of engineers, that sort of thing.

Can they move it to a man? Can they move that to more of a manufacturing focused endeavor? Right. And that's hard, that's, that's, that's been very, very hard

for that also somewhat unique because you go from agriculture, you leapfrog into services and now you're gonna go back to the mid point to the mid

point.

And, and I mean, you know, if, if you look at the numbers, some numbers show that actually manufacturing is actually shrunk in India, uh you know, even during this period where it's been emphasized, right? So

I don't think it's gonna happen unless you have, you know, a, a situation like Apple and Foxconn basically moving and just putting billions of dollars into an ecosystem and bringing 2nd and 3rd tier suppliers. And even then you have, you have these um these isolated hubs across India. You know, you know, that, that, that are potentially these hotbeds.

The other thing is, and, and I write about this in, in my book is, you know, what India really wants to do is it wants to, it wants to grow an indigenous um sort of cell phone, uh you know, mobile phone, uh sort of kind of ecosystem that then uh grows out into uh infrastructure for wireless and that type of thing. Um

And that to do that you need you, you, you need uh certain kinds of technology, right? So, you know, obviously you need chips, right? So if you can, if you can bring foreign investment in and you can get the right companies to come in and, and build those lagging edge chips and, and, and so on. Um Then that I, I think that's, that's gonna be critical and I think it's gonna be a big challenge. And as I mentioned, I think Malaysia will probably uh probably do that.

They are doing that and they will do that pretty well. Um And so, II, I really, I think this is a wait and see. And as one of my, and I'm not saying that I believe this is going to happen. I, I, you know, uh but you know, not to say this glibly, but, you know, India has missed a lot of opportunities, right?

Uh And the question is, are we going to see a repeat of that, or is this,

is this period in history right now where we have this massive paradigm shift in the West and we have all these things that we've been talking about the reorganization, the bifurcation, all of that

is, is this going to put them over the hump? Right? Is this, and

you know, if I'm, if I'm putting money on it, it's not good money at this point. Right. I mean, it is still a wait and see.

Well, at least the window is there,

is there no doubt.

And now it's really up to the policymakers to come up with the right policy environment and a stable regulatory environment to to make it happen.

Alexander Caffrey. This has been fantastic. Thank you very much for your time and insights.

Pleasure. Enjoyed it.

Great as always. Thanks to our listeners as well. Copy Time was produced by Ken Delbridge Violet, Lee and Daisy Sherma provided additional assistance. All 135 episodes of copy time are available on youtube and on major podcast platforms like Apple and Spotify. It is for information only and does not constitute any investment advice

for our research publications and webinars. You can find them all by Googling D BS Research Library. Have a great day.