Trump Regime to Blacklist China’s Top Chipmaker?

Region: ,

Pompeo reinvented China beyond where other US Chinaphobes have ever gone before.

Falsely calling its ruling authorities Washington’s greatest foreign threat, he recited a litany of fake news about the country days earlier.

Spending a small fraction on its military compared to the US, he falsely claimed Beijing “is building out its military” menacingly (sic).

He ignored China’s cooperative relations with other countries, confrontation with none — polar opposite how the US operates worldwide.

Beijing “infiltrated the US in ways that Russia has not (sic),” he roared.

It “destroyed tens of thousands of jobs all across the heartland of America (sic).”

No one in Beijing forced US companies to offshore jobs to China and other low-wage countries.

No one in Washington offered tax or other incentives for companies to maintain operations domestically or imposed penalties for moving them abroad.

The misnamed “Wuhan virus” was made in a US biolab, exported to China and other countries.

Pompeo and other US hardliners consistently blame other countries for crimes and other wrongdoing by Washington — victimized nations notably blamed for US crimes against them.

According to Reuters on Saturday, the Trump regime may add China’s top chipmaker Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) to the US Entity List, adding:

The blacklisting move “would force US suppliers to seek a difficult-to-obtain license before shipping to the company.

The Pentagon urged other US agencies to target SMIC this way, Reuters saying it’s unclear if State, Commerce, and Energy departments support the move.

The company is China’s top chipmaker, but it’s “second-tier to rival Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the industry’s market leader,” said Reuters.

Blacklisting Chinese firms adversely affect US high-tech suppliers.

Reuters said the Pentagon didn’t explain why it wants SMIC blacklisted, adding that the Trump regime focuses on firms that supply China’s military.

In the case of Huawei and its affiliate companies, blacklisting the them is all about wanting US telecom and communications companies to have a competitive advantage.

According to an SMIC spokesperson, the company doesn’t understand why it may be blacklisted in the US, indicating that it broke no laws and isn’t tied to China’s military, adding:

Company officials are “open to sincere and transparent communication with US government agencies in hope of resolving potential misunderstandings.”

According to telecom analyst Ma Jihua, the move against SMIC if comes will aim to stop the firm from supplying chips to Huawei, adding:

“(I)t’s impossible for SMIC to cut supplies to Huawei, and US action against SMIC will come sooner or later” — part of US war on China by other means that keeps escalating dangerously.

Ma indicated that if SMIC is blacklisted by the US, it can still buy raw materials for making chips from Japan and South Korea — unless Washington pressures them to cease supplying the company.

What’s going on increases the urgency for China and its enterprises to become self-sufficient by reducing and eliminating the need to rely on foreign suppliers in the US and other countries it can pressure to cut off supplies.

According to analysts following SMIC, blacklisting the company by the US will adversely affect China’s efforts to develop its integrated circuit and software industries.

Semiconductor research firm Isaiah Capital & Research head Eric Tseng said adding SMIC to the US Entity List “could disrupt (its) supply chain, affecting its production in CMOS sensors, smartphone fingerprints products, and power management integrated circuits-related products.”

SMIC and Huahong are the only Chinese firms able to produce chips by the most advanced technology in the country.

Shanghai-based Intralink consultancy’s Stewart Randall said blacklisting Chinese firms by the US means that any enterprises in the country able to compete with US companies worldwide may be threatened the same way.

“China has no choice but to try somehow to develop all equipment (domestically and) have a closed system.”

In August, Pompeo called for what he called a “clean network to safeguard America’s assets (by forming an) “end-to-end communication path that does not use any transmission, control, computing, or storage equipment from untrusted IT vendors, such as Huawei and ZTE.”

Given what’s going on, China and its enterprises need to free themselves from dependency on US suppliers by becoming self-sufficient.

Whether Republicans or Dems control things, the trend in Washington to isolate China and cut off its enterprises from the US market continues to escalate.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Visit his blog site at

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]