The 237 claims analyzed in this cluster describe a transformation of profound strategic significance: the evolution of export controls from discrete policy instruments into an increasingly institutionalized, multi-domain system of technological containment and counter-containment. This is not a temporary disruption but a defining structural feature of the U.S.–China technology relationship — one that carries material implications for any firm operating at the intersection of cloud computing, AI infrastructure, and global semiconductor supply chains.
The dynamic is best understood as a progressive escalation across two fundamentally interconnected fronts. On one side, the United States has tightened its grip on semiconductor manufacturing equipment and advanced chip exports through a sequence of administrative and legislative actions spanning late 2022 through early 2026 4. On the other, China has responded not merely with retaliatory critical-mineral embargoes but with a comprehensive, legally codified export-control regime of its own — one that leverages its dominance in upstream supply chains with increasing precision and coercive intent.
For an investor assessing Alphabet Inc., these developments create a complex web of exposures across cloud computing economics, AI hardware procurement, semiconductor supply-chain resilience, and geopolitical risk management. The scale of the domestic industrial response is itself revealing: the U.S. CHIPS Act has catalyzed approximately USD 630 billion in semiconductor investment 7 — a figure corroborated by four independent sources that underscores the magnitude of the state-led response now underway.
The U.S. Semiconductor Containment Strategy: From EUV to Ecosystem Controls
The logic of American export-control policy has followed a discernible pattern of expansion — from narrow capability restrictions to broad ecosystem containment. Extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography equipment had already been subject to a countrywide ban on exports to China prior to the current proposals 12,40. The critical escalation now under consideration targets deep ultraviolet (DUV) lithography, representing a strategic pivot from single-capability denial to what markets increasingly interpret as a comprehensive "technology containment strategy" aimed at constraining China's broader semiconductor ecosystem 12.
The primary legislative vehicle for this expanded posture is the Multilateral Alignment of Technology Controls on Hardware (MATCH) Act — a six-source corroborated proposal that would impose a countrywide ban on DUV machines and required tooling, expand entity-list prohibitions targeting specific Chinese semiconductor firms, require a 60-day chokepoint identification, mandate diplomatic engagement with allies within 150 days, and allow potential invocation of the Foreign Direct Product Rule (FDPR) to extend extraterritorial controls 5,8,12,40. The MATCH Act specifically names Hua Hong Semiconductor, ChangXin Memory Technologies, and other Chinese semiconductor firms as targets for additional restrictions 12,40.
A provision of particular consequence would restrict post-export services — including service, maintenance, and upgrades — for semiconductor equipment already installed in Chinese fabrication facilities 2,10,40. This would affect every advanced and near-advanced semiconductor fabrication plant in China 2, representing a significant escalation in the depth of existing controls. Notably, restrictions on DUV exports could be implemented within weeks to months via administrative tools under the Export Administration Regulations rather than requiring years of rulemaking 12.
Parallel administrative actions have reinforced this trajectory. The U.S. Validated End User (VEU) program for semiconductor fabrication facilities in China was eliminated in August 2025, closing a loophole that had allowed foreign semiconductor manufacturers to export to China without individual licenses 4. In January 2026, the Bureau of Industry and Security revised its licensing policy, shifting from a presumption of denial to case-by-case evaluations for certain AI chips including Nvidia's H200 and AMD's MI325X 2,6,16. Yet even where U.S. export licenses were granted, China independently blocked imports of H200 chips at its customs in January 2026, producing a binary on/off pattern for market access that neither government can unilaterally control 6. Compounding these measures, a 25% tariff on advanced semiconductor imports was imposed under Section 232 in January 2026, alongside equivalent tariffs on H200 chips shipped from Taiwan to the United States before onward transmission to China 2,6.
Enforcement mechanisms have intensified accordingly. During Q4 2025, export licensing authorities applied increased scrutiny and adopted stricter interpretations of end-use in licensing decisions 44. New or tightened sanctions regimes and end-use restrictions were introduced during the same period, directly affecting licensing decisions 44. The U.S. federal budget now allocates $122 million annually to policing export controls of advanced semiconductor technology 15 — a modest sum relative to the scale of the market being regulated, but a meaningful indicator of institutional commitment.
China's Legal and Regulatory Counter-Infrastructure
It would be a strategic error to interpret China's response as merely reactive or ad hoc. Beijing has methodically constructed a comprehensive export-control legal architecture, beginning with the Export Control Law (ECL) of 2020 45,46,49. This law — corroborated by four independent sources — established the unified legal basis regulating dual-use items, military products, nuclear materials, and other goods, technologies, and services related to national security 45,49. Since 2020, China has expanded this framework through implementing regulations, control lists, licensing mechanisms, and enforcement tools 43,45,49.
The 2024 Dual-Use Regulations (Regulations of Export Control of Dual-Use Items) consolidated existing control lists, clarified licensing procedures, defined compliance responsibilities, and created a watch-list system 43,45. Significantly, these regulations brought China's control lists more closely into alignment with the Wassenaar Arrangement and other multilateral export control regimes 45 — an ironic but telling development that suggests Beijing is learning from the very architectures it seeks to counter.
The Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law of 2021 provides an additional tool to restrict trade with designated individuals and entities on national security grounds 43,45. China has also established an Unreliable Entity List (UEL) analogous to U.S. tools 43. In April 2026, China adopted a new regulation to protect industrial and supply-chain security that explicitly enables export controls to be used as countermeasures 43,45 — a four-source corroborated development that signals Beijing's intent to weaponize its regulatory framework proactively rather than defensively.
The cumulative effect is significant. By the end of 2025, China's licensing and administrative requirements effectively amounted to de facto export bans for certain items 43. Implementation can be selective and politically timed, creating mixed international perceptions about China's intentions 49. Reports indicate selective implementation of export licenses, with end-2025 rare-earth general licenses granted but potentially applied selectively 45. China's export-control measures have created compliance costs, uncertainty, and delays for importers worldwide 45, and further clarification of implementing rules with more active enforcement are anticipated 49.
Critical Minerals as the Primary Retaliatory Weapon
China's most potent asymmetric weapon lies in its dominance over critical mineral supply chains — a structural advantage built over decades of strategic industrial policy. The pattern of retaliatory export controls has progressively expanded in both scope and precision.
Gallium and Germanium. In December 2024, China prohibited exports of gallium, germanium, antimony, and superhard materials to the United States 2,43,45. These materials have been cited as precedent examples and are critical inputs for U.S. manufacturing 28,37. On April 2, 2025 — "Liberation Day," when the United States imposed unprecedentedly high tariffs — China responded by adding multiple medium-to-heavy rare earths to its export-control list 46.
Tungsten. In February 2025, China introduced export controls and cut mining quotas for tungsten 47, resulting in a 13.75% year-over-year reduction in global tungsten supply 29. Implementation of restrictive export licensing for tungsten has contributed to international supply pressure 47. China implemented export controls on tungsten in December 2025 (three-source corroborated) 29,47,48, requiring special export licenses for tungsten carbide powders and tungsten heavy alloys 48. Chinese export controls are a primary driver of recent tungsten price increases 31. The strategic significance is acute: a complete Chinese tungsten embargo or further export-control tightening would severely impair U.S. industrial capacity given that domestic tungsten production ceased in 2015 29 — a two-source corroborated finding that should command the attention of any firm dependent on semiconductor manufacturing or electronics assembly.
Samarium and Rare Earths. In April 2025, China placed samarium and samarium refining and exports under export controls 25, increasing the risk that foreign hardware manufacturers dependent on samarium-cobalt magnets will face restricted access 25. In mid-May 2025, following a U.S. Commerce clarification regarding Huawei Ascend, China halted rare earth exports entirely 46. China announced export controls on dysprosium (Dy) and terbium (Tb) in 2025 21. Silver export controls were announced effective December 31, 2025 2. Chinese exports of yttrium to the United States fell from 333 tons to 17 tons after export restrictions 35 — a 95% decline that demonstrates the potency of these measures.
Antimony and Extraterritorial Controls. China's ban on antimony exports to the United States is suspended until November 27, 2026 — a three-source corroborated finding — though exports still require Beijing-issued licenses 33. In October 2025, China made exports of certain critical materials subject to extraterritorial controls, though this measure was subsequently suspended for one year following a high-level agreement 43,45.
Escalatory Actions Against Japan and the European Union
China has demonstrated willingness to apply export controls as coercive diplomatic instruments beyond the bilateral U.S.–China relationship. In early 2026, China imposed new export controls on Japan in response to remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi about Taiwan 43,45,46. These measures were viewed as punitive and coercive diplomacy — and as a warning to other states regarding their positions on Taiwan 43.
The January 2026 measures included a ban on exports of all dual-use items and critical materials to Japanese military end-users — a five-source corroborated action 43,45. Twenty Japanese entities were placed on a Chinese watch list in 2026 as part of these measures 43. The economic impact was immediate and severe: during the first two months following China's January 2026 export controls, Chinese exports of controlled products to Japan fell by 43% 46. According to a CSIS analysis, both China's mid-2025 export halt and the January 2026 export controls contributed to this decline 46.
China also listed European Union entities in its export control system in 2026; that listing occurred one day after the EU imposed sanctions on Russia 43. The European Union's 20th round of sanctions includes export controls aimed at entities largely in China and Hong Kong 22, indicating a multilateral tightening dynamic in which both Washington and Beijing are building coalitions and applying pressure through overlapping regulatory frameworks.
The Solar Manufacturing Equipment Front
A relatively new dimension of export-control escalation involves solar manufacturing equipment — a domain where China holds a position of dominance comparable to its critical mineral leverage. Reuters has reported that China held preliminary consultations with solar-equipment suppliers about possible export restrictions to the United States, potentially including heterojunction (HJT) technology 17. China is considering implementing limits on exports of its most advanced solar-panel technology and equipment to the United States 14.
A senior analyst from Clean Energy Associates characterized potential Chinese export restrictions on solar manufacturing equipment as a "nuclear option in the solar trade war" 41. The U.S. government justified its March 2026 tariffs on Chinese solar cells and modules by citing concerns over forced labor practices and non-market economic policies 41. Chinese export restrictions on solar manufacturing equipment are being presented as retaliatory measures following those U.S. tariffs 41.
The strategic significance extends beyond the solar industry itself. Potential Chinese export restrictions on advanced photovoltaic manufacturing equipment, including HJT technology, could threaten U.S. companies' plans to build new or expand existing domestic PV manufacturing facilities 14,17. This would complicate implementation of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act's domestic manufacturing incentives 41 and create regulatory uncertainty risk for U.S. manufacturing plans 14. The timing of potential Chinese export restrictions remains contingent upon ongoing U.S.–China economic dialogues scheduled for May 2026 41.
Supply Chain Implications and Systemic Vulnerabilities
Export controls and potential outright bans on critical minerals create immediate systemic risk to global production of electric vehicles, drones, semiconductors, and cryptocurrency mining rigs 11. The mismatch in timelines — fabrication plants take years to build, legislation can pass in months, and retaliatory trade restrictions can be implemented in days — creates a structural window of vulnerability for U.S. semiconductor supply chains that no amount of domestic investment can immediately close 2.
Allied implementation has been uneven, a source of persistent strategic friction. The Netherlands and Japan implemented semiconductor export controls in mid-to-late 2023, with a 9-to-11-month gap following initial U.S. controls in October 2022 5. Japan's 2023 controls were implemented as a license requirement for all destinations rather than as a blanket embargo 5. Japan is now tightening semiconductor export controls as part of its broader pivot away from China 13, though Japan's tightening of export controls on critical materials creates supply-chain disruption risks for South Korea's semiconductor and electronics sectors 52. Tightening export controls on semiconductor material inputs — including fluorinated polyimide, photoresists, and hydrogen fluoride — risk disrupting South Korea's high-tech manufacturing and related global supply chains 52.
The MATCH Act includes a notable coercive provision requiring Japan to expand its semiconductor equipment restrictions within 150 days or risk losing access to American technology in its own supply chain 2,19 — a mechanism that reveals the extent to which Washington is willing to apply pressure on allies to achieve alignment.
Export-control regimes including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations are reshaping global trade flows in intermediate semiconductor goods, rerouting traffic through logistics hubs that meet compliance requirements 30. Corporate compliance with export controls is now a governance requirement for companies operating in U.S.–China technology supply chains 24. For example, one firm stated it will not engage in transactions involving certain Chinese-origin chips without obtaining required export licenses 9.
Escalation and De-escalation Cycles
The chronology reveals a pattern of action and reaction punctuated by diplomatic interventions — a rhythm that investors must track with care. By the end of October 2025, following talks in Busan, the U.S.–China trade war entered a cold phase or détente, and export-control actions that could affect China were effectively paused 46. A Trump–Xi summit in Beijing was scheduled for May 14–15, at which potential discussions about easing U.S. export controls on Nvidia chips to China could occur 27. In March 2026, about six weeks before the planned summit, China approved large aerospace exports — a potential goodwill gesture 26. A trade-focused diplomatic summit in May, coinciding with President Trump's trip to Beijing, provides a potential venue where semiconductor export enforcement actions may intersect with trade diplomacy 42. Policy uncertainty related to equipment export restrictions is expected to extend through May 2026 pending outcomes of U.S.–China economic dialogue 41.
Countervailing Dynamics: Domestic Development and Market Distortions
Export controls and China's localization policies are, paradoxically, driving efforts toward chip autonomy that may ultimately strengthen Chinese competitors 39. Huawei Technologies has been strengthened by Chinese policy responses to U.S. export controls 34. In response to U.S. restrictions on EDA software exports, the Chinese government pivoted funding to domestic EDA companies to accelerate local semiconductor design tool development 46. U.S. export restrictions on premium GPUs have removed the primary hurdle to Huawei's enterprise adoption 32.
Government-driven procurement and R&D for domestically optimized models could increase demand for U.S. semiconductor manufacturers 23. A policy proposal coupling export controls with hardware-software co-design creates potential market opportunities for domestic U.S. chip vendors, AI tool vendors, and system integrators 23. Premium pricing on semiconductors has been attributed to a combination of high demand and export controls 36 — a trend that directly affects the capital expenditure calculus for hyperscale cloud providers.
The United States has also imposed broader trade measures: a 15% tariff regime on semiconductor and renewable-energy components 38, and the U.S. Trade Representative took action in 2025 over China's targeting of maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors, though that action was later suspended for one year 18. The U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security tightened export restrictions in March 2025 16 and added 16 entities to the Entity List in January 2025 4. In 2023, 154 Chinese companies were added to the U.S. Entity List 46. Two Chinese entities were added to the Entity List in March 2025 for selling U.S.-origin items to Huawei and HiSilicon 4.
Historical precedents inform current policy. U.S. export-control sanctions were imposed on ZTE beginning in 2018, materially weakening ZTE's bargaining position in standard-essential patent licensing negotiations 50,51. The English Patents Court found that these sanctions reduced ZTE's bargaining power in earlier license negotiations 50. Previous policy actions such as bans on Huawei and semiconductor export controls are cited as historical policy parallels informing the timing and scope of proposed new regulations 20.
Analysis and Significance for Alphabet Inc.
The export-control dynamic described above creates a complex web of risks and strategic considerations for Alphabet Inc. that cut across multiple business lines. A sober assessment must consider at least five distinct dimensions of exposure.
Cloud and AI Infrastructure Cost Pressure. The progressive tightening of semiconductor export controls — from EUV to DUV to potential ecosystem-wide containment — affects the global supply and pricing of advanced chips that underpin Google Cloud's AI infrastructure. If export controls constrain total addressable semiconductor supply or bifurcate the market into distinct U.S.-aligned and China-aligned technology stacks, the cost of compute hardware for AI training and inference could rise structurally. The claims tying premium semiconductor pricing to export controls 36 suggest that these dynamics are already being priced into supply chains. For a hyperscaler operating at Google's scale, any structural increase in chip costs flows directly to capital expenditure requirements and margin profiles.
Supply Chain Complexity and Geopolitical Exposure. The 237 claims paint a picture of a world in which governments on both sides of the Pacific have built legal and regulatory infrastructures capable of disrupting supply chains within days. The finding that fabrication plants take years to build, legislation can pass in months, and retaliatory restrictions can be implemented in days 2 underscores the asymmetry that Alphabet must navigate. Alphabet's hardware supply chain — including TPUs, server infrastructure, and networking equipment — depends on a global semiconductor ecosystem now subject to overlapping, sometimes contradictory, export-control regimes. The closure of the VEU program 4 and potential extension of restrictions to servicing existing equipment in China 2,10 could affect Alphabet's ability to maintain or refresh computing infrastructure in or sourced from affected regions.
Critical Mineral Exposure. China's expanding critical-mineral export controls — covering gallium, germanium, tungsten, antimony, rare earths, samarium, and silver — create systemic risk to global electronics manufacturing 11. For Alphabet, the primary concern is not direct mineral procurement but the downstream impact on semiconductor fabrication, substrate manufacturing, and electronics assembly. Tungsten supply reductions of 13.75% 29 and the near-total collapse of yttrium exports to the United States 35 are signals of a broader trend that could affect the availability and pricing of components across Alphabet's hardware portfolio.
Dual-Use Technology Risk. The expanding scope of what constitutes controlled technology — from EDA software 3,46 to machine tools 46 to aviation equipment 46 — means that Alphabet's research collaborations, open-source AI contributions, and international partnerships face increasing compliance scrutiny. The CHIPS Act's USD 630 billion in catalyzed investment 7 and the USD 122 million annual budget for policing export controls 15 indicate the scale of the regulatory apparatus now in place. Compliance is no longer a back-office function but a strategic governance requirement 24.
Competitive Landscape Implications. Export controls may paradoxically strengthen Chinese competitors while creating opportunities for U.S. incumbents. Huawei's strengthening 34 and China's localization push 1,39 suggest that Google's competitors in the Chinese and potentially global AI market may benefit from protectionist policies that limit foreign technology access. Conversely, if export controls create a captive U.S. market for advanced chips and AI services — through government-driven procurement and domestic optimization 23 — Alphabet could benefit from reduced competition and increased demand for domestically validated AI infrastructure.
Geopolitical Event Risk. The pattern of retaliatory export controls triggered by diplomatic events — including Japanese Prime Minister remarks on Taiwan 43,45 and EU sanctions on Russia 43 — indicates that Alphabet's supply chains are exposed to geopolitical flashpoints beyond direct U.S.–China bilateral dynamics. The 43% decline in controlled-product exports to Japan following China's measures 46 demonstrates the economic potency of Chinese export controls when applied. The May 2026 Trump–Xi summit 27,42 represents a near-term catalyst that could either ease or intensify these pressures.
Key Takeaways
Export controls have evolved from targeted policy tools into systemic structural features of the global technology landscape. Both the U.S. MATCH Act and China's post-2020 export-control architecture represent permanent, institutionalized regimes rather than temporary measures. Alphabet should assume that these constraints will persist and likely expand, incorporating them into long-term supply chain planning, capital allocation, and geographic risk assessment for cloud and AI infrastructure.
Critical mineral supply chains face escalating and potentially irreversible disruption risk. China's demonstrated willingness to deploy export controls on gallium, germanium, tungsten, antimony, rare earths, samarium, and other materials — with documented supply reductions of 13–14% for tungsten and 43% declines in exports to Japan — creates direct upstream risk for semiconductor and electronics manufacturing. Alphabet should evaluate the mineral supply-chain exposure of its key hardware components and consider whether diversified sourcing or strategic stockpiling is warranted.
The May 2026 U.S.–China summit represents a critical near-term inflection point. The timing of potential Chinese solar equipment restrictions and the extension of U.S. semiconductor export controls are both contingent on the outcome of scheduled diplomatic engagements 27,41,42. Investors should monitor summit outcomes closely, as they will likely determine whether the current trajectory of escalation continues, pauses, or reverses — with material implications for semiconductor supply, pricing, and the competitive positioning of U.S. hyperscalers.
The bifurcation of global technology ecosystems into U.S.-aligned and China-aligned spheres creates both risks and strategic opportunities for Alphabet. Export controls are accelerating China's push toward chip autonomy 39 and strengthening Huawei 34, potentially creating a parallel technology stack that could erode Google's addressable market in certain regions. Simultaneously, domestic U.S. procurement and R&D incentives 23 and the hardware-software co-design opportunities created by export controls 23 could benefit Alphabet's cloud and AI businesses if Google positions itself as the preferred provider for domestically validated infrastructure.
Sources
1. Alibaba and China Telecom deploy 10,000 Zhenwu chips in a new AI data center, signaling China’s shif... - 2026-04-09
2. The US wants to cut off China’s chip equipment. China says the supply chain will break for everyone. - 2026-04-25
3. Hacker News - 2026-04-27
4. all-press-releases | Bureau of Industry and Security - 2026-04-14
5. The MATCH Act Is the Missing Piece in America’s AI Export Control Strategy - 2026-04-13
6. Export Controls: National Security Tool or Industrial Policy Lever? | Perspectives on Innovation | CSIS - 2026-05-01
7. The great rotation: AI, deadweight loss, and the end of easy compounding - 2026-04-09
8. 2026-04-03 Briefing - alobbs.com - 2026-04-03
9. Salt Mine Ranch industrial products are now UNAVAILABLE TO FOREIGN PERSONS, governments without a mi... - 2026-04-02
10. A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers has introduced new legislation aimed at tightening export contr... - 2026-04-04
11. CRITICAL MINERAL CHOKEHOLD 🔋🌍 Critical minerals are the new oil, and the supply chain chokeholds ar... - 2026-04-06
12. 🚨 ASML STOCK DROPS AS US WEIGHS NEW CHIP EXPORT BAN ON CHINA This isn’t just headline risk anymore…... - 2026-04-07
13. 💥As Japan pivots away from China to fortify its national security, a new strategic axis is emerging ... - 2026-04-12
14. BREAKING: China Considers Solar Tech Restrictions $TE $FSLR $MP $UAMY Chinese officials have held ... - 2026-04-15
15. Federal prosecutors have charged six people in the past three weeks with smuggling billions of dolla... - 2026-04-15
16. $NVDA $MU $SNDK $LITE - I listened to this Jensen interview in its entirety. The thing it did unques... - 2026-04-15
17. Following Rare Earth Minerals, China Uses "Photovoltaic Equipment as a Weapon" to Counter the U.S. ... - 2026-04-16
18. China, China, China De-Coupling - Re-Organizing Supply Chains ===== 1. Tighten the technology blo... - 2026-04-17
19. China activates 60,000 chip AI cluster in 2 months without US tech | Mrigakshi Dixit, Interesting En... - 2026-04-18
20. The SAFE LiDAR Act is one of the most under-discussed policy developments in the autonomy right now—... - 2026-04-19
21. 📚 Part of a Bigger Series https://t.co/QyRkdpzG6I This is Ionic Technologies Magnet Recycl... - 2026-04-20
22. https://t.co/ADX7Fzz5hI On April 23, European Union (#EU) adopted its 20th round of sanctions again... - 2026-04-30
23. maybe for the the export controls and anti china policy to really hold up, the US govt would probabl... - 2026-04-30
24. US export controls on chips and hardware alone will not prevent China from further developing advanc... - 2026-04-30
25. @Reuters The under-discussed layer of Chinese military exports: every modern submarine runs on samar... - 2026-04-30
26. @Reuters China controls roughly 90% of the world’s rare earth processing. Only 25% of US export lice... - 2026-04-30
27. @JP_Money_95630 Yes, the Trump-Xi summit in Beijing on May 14-15 could potentially open discussions ... - 2026-04-30
28. $LPTH increasing my position here @ $12.28 lightpath is the only major u.s. producer of black dia... - 2026-04-30
29. @unusual_whales The commodity of interest here is tungsten. China controls ~80% of global supply an... - 2026-05-01
30. @SemiAnalysis_ Wafer intensity per compute unit rising. More intermediate goods crossing borders und... - 2026-05-01
31. Tungsten prices are continuing to move higher, Reuters reporting record levels driven by China’s ex... - 2026-05-01
32. Huawei’s projected $12 billion in AI revenue marks a critical tipping point where Western export con... - 2026-05-01
33. Two clocks are running. The truce clock: China's U.S. antimony ban is suspended until November 27, ... - 2026-05-01
34. Huawei's AI chip sales are surging three years into US export controls aimed at slowing Chinese AI. ... - 2026-05-01
35. ONE YEAR AFTER CHINA'S RARE EARTH EXPORT CONTROLS, THE U.S. IS STILL HOOKED • Domestic output hit a... - 2026-05-01
36. $SMH China's 1M Nvidia AI servers reveal global chip shortages, with high demand and export controls... - 2026-05-01
37. @BonnieGlaser Expect Beijing to formally blacklist U.S. firms restricting their ability to do busine... - 2026-05-01
38. Global Markets Slide as New Tariff Regime Targets China and European Financial Centers - 2026-04-03
39. DIGITIMES Asia: News and Insight of the Global Supply Chain - 2026-05-02
40. Bill to ban sale of key AI chipmaking equipment to China introduced in House - 2026-04-02
41. China weighs curbs on exports of solar manufacturing equipment to U.S., sources say - 2026-04-15
42. We’re only seeing the tip of the chip-smuggling iceberg - 2026-04-15
43. China’s export control framework: domestic developments and international positioning - 2026-04-29
44. Official Statistics: Strategic export controls: licensing statistics: 1 October to 31 December 2025 - 2026-04-30
45. China’s export control framework: domestic developments and international positioning - 2026-04-29
46. Reining in the Export Control Arms Race - 2026-04-10
47. War pressure exposes global strain on critical metal tungsten supply - 2026-04-30
48. Tungsten breaks records as China export curbs, military demand boost investment - 2026-04-29
49. China’s Export Control Framework: Domestic Developments and International Positioning – Analysis - 2026-05-01
50. International Sanctions and the FRAND Framework - 2026-05-01
51. International Sanctions and the FRAND Framework - 2026-05-01
52. Yoshiko Sakurai Asks How Japan Should Defend Itself: Export Controls on South Korea, North Korea, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, and the Strait of Hormuz - 2026-05-02
