Why did the Netherlands suddenly attack Chinese companies? Aren't you afraid of repeating the mistakes of Poland? Faced with this kind of politically biased interference, what strategies does China have to break the situation?
The Dutch government and judicial agencies recently adopted a series of harsh measures on the basis of so-called "national security" against China's semiconductor enterprise Zhou Tai Technologies.
It not only announced the freezing of the assets and intellectual property rights of 30 operating entities around the world for a period of one year;
Even the Dutch Enterprise Court ruled that it suspended the CEO appointed by parent company Wentai Technology from performing his duties and required the appointment of a foreign director with decisive voting rights to represent Anshi Semiconductor Holdings.
It can be said that the action of the Netherlands against Chinese enterprises this time is simply a naked "robber" behavior.
Wingtech Technology subsequently issued a statement strongly protesting, arguing that this was "excessive intervention under geopolitical bias."
People who are familiar with international affairs are not difficult to find. The Dutch operation is exactly the same as Poland's previous suspension of China-Europe freight trains. It is all to please Western forces and regard its own economic interests as a "name for it."
Not long ago, Poland closed its border on the grounds of "Russian drone invasion" and cut off the key channel of China-Europe freight trains.
It should be noted that the port of Malawi was responsible for 90% of the Central European transit, annual revenue of more than 1 billion euros, can blockade order, Poland's average daily loss of up to 200 million euros.
Ironically, Poland thinks it can exchange for Western aid, but ultimately only gets a cup of watercoach salary, instead allowing China to open the Arctic route, adding a safe route for shipping goods to Europe.
Today, the Netherlands is following the old path of Poland, and it is a competition to see whose head is more "iron".
The key, however, is that the Dutch semiconductor industry is heavily dependent on the Chinese market, and Asma's share of Chinese market revenue has exceeded 25%, this unilateral action is undoubtedly shaking its own industrial foundations.
It is not without concerns within the Netherlands. Asmail executives have privately expressed "concern about the loss of the market." You should know that China's huge demand for lithography machines is a market that cannot be abandoned for Asmail.
In 2023, the Netherlands adjusted its lithography machine policy due to economic pressure. Now, in the Anshi incident, it may not be reconsidered due to industrial damage.
After all, ASML's revenue growth is inseparable from the Chinese market, and it is difficult for the Dutch government to ignore the actual interests of enterprises for a long time.
Just like Poland personally destroyed the "golden rice bowl" of logistics, the Netherlands 'current short-sighted move will eventually cost itself the economic price.
The Netherlands may think that in this way, it can shake the “neck” of the Chinese semiconductor, but forgot that China is best at opening new paths in the blockade, and the lessons of Poland have long proved this.
After Poland cut off the Central European line, China soon launched the Arctic route, not only not too much affected, but instead built a more stable three-dimensional logistics network, leaving Poland's "car neck" completely invalid.
In the field of semiconductors, Dutch intervention has also become a “catalyst” for China’s independent innovation.
After the Anshi incident, domestic semiconductor companies will only become more determined to build an independent ecosystem.
On key equipment such as lithography machines, Chinese companies are also accelerating research and development, and the localization rate of core components continues to increase.
These developments all confirm the fact that external pressure has never been able to stop China's development, but will instead force the industry to accelerate its upgrading.
From Poland to the Netherlands, these “head iron” operations have been repeatedly proven: In the era of globalization, to politicize economic issues is ultimately to move the stone to knock your feet.
Poland has lost the transit dividend of China-Europe freight trains, and now the Netherlands is also facing the risk of damage to the semiconductor industry and decline in international credibility.
China’s response is the same: Not initiatively provoking confrontation, but never accepting unfair treatment; others break the old path, they open new path; outside pressure, they build the foundation with independent innovation.
The Netherlands may still be immersed in the illusion of “political correctness” now, but as China’s semiconductor autonomy advances, the Netherlands will finally understand:
Cooperating with the United States to engage in "robbery" intervention will not seize China's development opportunities, but will only take away its own market share.
China's "unusual" has never been a slogan-style confrontation, but a legal defense of rights and interests, solidifying the bottom line with independent innovation, and giving answers with the choice of the market.
This rational and determined attitude is precisely the best response to the “geopolitical abduction economy.”