US tech decoupling from China exposes fragility of unilateral export controls amid global AI chip supply chain interdependence
Original framing: “Arm Holdings CEO says US would have difficulty banning AI CPU chip exports to China - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
The US has a long history of tech export controls, from COCOM during the Cold War to the 2018 ZTE ban, which ultimately accelerated China's indigenous semiconductor development. Each attempt at unilateral tech decoupling has backfired, as seen in the 1980s when Japan's semiconductor industry thrived despite US restrictions. The current US-China tech rivalry echoes the 19th-century 'Great Game' between Britain and Russia, where control over critical resources (then oil, now chips) defined geopolitical power.
The US-China AI chip rivalry is a symptom of deeper systemic fragilities in global tech governance, where unilateral export controls ignore the interdependence of supply chains and the historical pattern of sanctions backfiring.
Arm's CEO inadvertently highlights this paradox by admitting the US's limited ability to enforce bans, revealing the absurdity of state-centric control in a hyper-connected world. The narrative obscures how this rivalry accelerates indigenous tech sovereignty in China and fragments innovation ecosystems, with marginalised voices—from Taiwanese workers to African innovators—bearing the brunt. A systemic solution requires multilateral governance frameworks that manage tech transfers without escalating decoupling, paired with investments in indigenous tech sovereignty and supply chain diversification. The trickster's role, embodied by Hermes and the carnivalesque disruption of solemn geopolitical narratives, underscores the need for humility in policymaking—recognizing that control is an illusion in a world where tech flows transcend borders.