US Strengthens Tech Ties With India But Doesn't Seek Decoupling From China, Raimondo Says (techcrunch.com) 26
The U.S. government is not seeking to "decouple" from China, nor is it seeking "technological decoupling," but Washington "would like to see India achieve its aspirations to play a larger role in the electronics supply chain," U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on Friday. From a report: On its part, the U.S. signed a memorandum of understanding with India on Friday to cooperate in the semiconductor sector. The semiconductor industries in both the nations are beginning to assess the resiliency and gaps in the supply chain network, said Raimondo, whose department is overseeing pouring of about $52 billion into the U.S. semiconductor industry. [...] But even as India and the U.S. tighten their tech ties, Washington is not looking to cut reliance on China, she insisted. "We see India as a trusted technology partner and we want to continue to deepen our technological relationship with India. But I also want to make it clear that the United States doesn't seek to decouple from China."
File it under: Never learning your lesson (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I get your point, but diversification is almost never a bad strategy. Despite the numerous obvious-in-hindsight issues with sourcing manufacturing to China was the issue of putting all our eggs in a single basket. Great for cost cutting and efficiency in good times. A terrible idea if anything goes wrong with that single source.
More than likely, the US government is also being realistic, in that we're just far too entrenched and entangled with China right now to get serious about pulling away from them.
Re: (Score:2)
I get your point, but diversification is almost never a bad strategy. Despite the numerous obvious-in-hindsight issues with sourcing manufacturing to China was the issue of putting all our eggs in a single basket. Great for cost cutting and efficiency in good times. A terrible idea if anything goes wrong with that single source.
It's interesting that the world was willing to bet on China as a single source. I used to work in the hard disk drive industry when there were essentially just two players, Seagate and Western Digital. Avoiding single source was such an unbreakable law that R&D in either company would have to avoid getting technologically too far ahead of the other competitor because integrators wouldn't even consider the better device if it were single-sourced. Instead, engineering timelines were stretched into the
Re: File it under: Never learning your lesson (Score:2)
What the US would like to see out of China (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
OF COURSE NOT!
China is a government supported IP kleptocracy.
Re: (Score:3)
We need to be friendly with countries on earth, BUT we need to make sure to prevent being dependent upon them, especially ones hostile to the US like communist china.
And yes, be friendly to India, but let's not be dependent upon them.
The US is a very large country with lots of resources....let's bring back a lot of our work and resources usage for the domestic market and keep it that way.
Talk about a national security bonus
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Not in a one-sided relationship like China.
Sorry.
We've been trying this with them for decades.
It does not work.
So let the bastards compete on the open market.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironic.
Re: (Score:2)
co-dependency can be a stabilizing factor for peace though
This was part of the thinking for Western engagement in China in the 90s, that a new "peace" would arise from China seeing and embracing the benefits of Western freedoms, values, and democracy. That was extremely foolish thinking that in hindsight based on understanding of past history was very likely to fail.
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, I hope we (the US) ARE trying to eventually decouple with communist china.
You want something that's not happening with someone who doesn't exist to not be happening? Merry Christmas, that's already the case.
People who believe China is communist must also believe that the Nazis were socialists and North Korea is a democracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Great way to rip us off, then flood our market with cheap knockoffs.
NO.
Lies (Score:2)
Washington is not looking to cut reliance on China, she insisted.
She lies.
Re: No thanks (Score:1)
Oh no. More than a billion people must savage idiots to keep electing theocraric rulers. Twice. With increasing vote share.
Those who do not learn form history (Score:2)
While China made the nation-building decision of building their own factories, India with all their 'make local' rules, continues to rely on OEM in other countries: Systemic corruption means India cannot maintain the infrastructure for building and operating factories.
The USA has a terrible track-record on this: The US failed to fight the corruption in Pakistan, and what infrastructure the USA did build, was unreliable. The lack of nation-building caused a never-ending war that the US decided to litera
Re: Those who do not learn form history (Score:1)
Why do you think US is interested in nation building? US had closer ties with India during 1950s and 60s than Pakistan. There is a reason why US picked Pakistan over India then and it is not for nation building.
Re: (Score:2)
"Nation-building" was the Bush-ism used both for the invasion of Afghanistan and the military alliance with Pakistan. Obviously, it did not apply to a economically-stable country that openly resisted the war against Afghanistan. At the time, no-one discussed the ineffectiveness of the alliance even while Bush struggled to hold Pakistan to the deal.
Re: (Score:1)
I am always surprised by the amount of white-washing and as an attempt of do-goodery Americans paint their own actions as the history progresses.
Nation building is what Bush said. Not what he did and "nation building" or "building democracy" was not even tried nor it had absolutely any support in the American public. This is well studied and backed up by multiple surveys. The use of that term is nothing but bullshitting those who didn't see it happen in front of their eyes. USA paid money to Pakistan and Af
Go back to USA. (Score:2)
Stop outsourcing!
How will the Dalits do? (Score:2)
I would refuse to sign any agreements with India until they could prove they have enforced regulations in place to avoid human rights violations. And India is not allowed to use their perfect human rights cause that Dalits are Dalits not humans.
Re: (Score:2)
India doesn't even keep official tallies of how many citizens starve because they would be inconvenient to admit to. https://www.thenewhumanitarian... [thenewhumanitarian.org]
If you're looking for someplace with better human rights than China, maybe India isn't the best place to look.
On the other hand, they are probably several times less likely to engage in expansionism, so it's still a smarter place to spend money if you have to pick one.
Can't wait for the future headlines! (Score:1)