Incorporating AI into your business can be a delicate balance between speed and intelligence. That's why you might want to consider the Clawed 3 Family Models from Anthropic for your Enterprise AI. Hikou is their Light and Fast model, Opus is their most powerful model capable of high order thinking, and Sonnet is the best combination of both speed and intelligence. Join the thousands of enterprises who use Anthropic to navigate this new frontier.
Visit anthropic.com slash Clawed, C-L-A-U-D-E today. Jumpstart your Genius with Clawed 3 by Anthropic. Apple Card is the perfect cashback rewards credit card. You earn up to 3% daily cash on every purchase every day. That's 3% on your favorite products at Apple, 2% on all other Apple Card with Apple Pay purchases, and 1% on anything you buy with your titanium Apple Card or virtual card number. Visit apple.co slash card calculator to see how much you can earn.
Apple Card issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Salt Lake City Branch, subject to credit approval, and the tax return supply. Hi everyone from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is on with Kara Swisher and I'm Kara Swisher. Today, we're going to talk about our ultimate frenemy, China.
Earlier this month, President Biden held a trilateral meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Fami Ashita and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to discuss strengthening economic ties and ramping up security in the South China Sea. But the invisible presence in the room was Chinese leader Xi Jinping. American lawmakers are worried that China is spying on us, manipulating public opinion with TikTok and also getting ready to invade Taiwan in the not-so-distant future.
After this week, they passed a bipartisan foreign aid bill that includes over $8 billion for Taiwan and other allies in the Indo-Pacific and tacked on an amendment that could lead to a ban on TikTok in the US. Yes, they did it, kids. I obviously have a lot of thoughts in the matter, so make sure to listen next Monday when I interview Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell from Washington, whose support was crucial to getting the bill passed.
I've also known her a long time when she was a former tech executive up in Seattle. At first, we're bringing you a live conversation taped at American University on April 16th with two people who know a lot about cybersecurity, foreign policy, and US-China relations. I've also known them a long time, and it was a really bracing conversation.
Dimitri Alperavitch is the co-founder and former CTO of CrowdStrike and the executive chairman of Silverado Policy Accelerator, a Washington think tank focused on national security. He's got a new book coming out called World on the Brink, How America Can Be China in the Race for the 21st Century. And Chris Krebs is the Chief Intelligence Officer at Sentinel-1 and the former director of CISA, the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency.
As you may remember, former President Trump infamously fired him via tweet after Krebs refused to back Trump's stolen election theories. Our expert question this episode comes from former Republican Congressman Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, who was chairman of the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the US and the Chinese Communist Party, at least until he left office on April 19th. I also did a great interview with him recently, which you should go back and listen to.
We'll have my conversation with Dimitri and Chris in just a minute. This episode is brought to you by On Investing, an original podcast from Charles Schwab. Each week, hosts Liz Ann Sonders, Schwab's Chief Investment Strategist, and Kathy Jones, Schwab's Chief Fist Income Strategist, analyze economic developments, and bring context to conversations around equities, fixed income, the economy, and more.
Join Kathy, Liz Ann, and their guests as they share insights on what might be moving the markets and why, as well as what indicators they are watching for sides of change. They'll also answer investor questions on everything from how sectors are evolving to what the bond markets are telling us, to where to look for opportunities, and considerations for your portfolio. You can download the latest episode of On Investing and subscribe so you never miss an episode at Schwab.com slash on investing.
Or wherever you get your podcast. Support for On with Keraswisher comes from Nerd Wallet. You don't have to be a genius to start making better financial decisions today. It's not that sexy, but piling up lots of little monetary victories today can yield some pretty significant rewards down the line. The tricky part is knowing where to start. Nerd Wallet can help. Their financial experts have helped countless people find new ways to maximize every dollar they earn.
While the team is helping folks get more from every dollar, they spend. Nerd Wallet as you compare top-travel credits side by side to maximize your spending. Some even offering up to 10 times the points on every dollar you charge. Their expert team of nerds did the work reviewing top credit cards so you can trust that you have the smartest one for future you.
If I had better rewards right now, I would probably travel to Hawaii and be sitting on a beach and not talking into this microphone right now. I would be enjoying a my tie, possibly swimming, doubtful I would be surfing, but I would spend them all there. Wherever you go next, make it happen with a smarter travel credit card. Don't wait to make smart financial decisions. Compare and find smarter credit cards, savings accounts, and more today at nerdwallet.com. Nerd Wallet, finance smarter.
Reminder, credit is subject to lender approval and term supply. Support for on with Keraswhisher comes from Babel. Learning a new language doesn't just give you dozens of new ways to swear. Studies show that people who learn new languages develop better memories and get more comfortable solving difficult problems. In turn, confidence improves and perspectives open, allowing for more flexibility no matter what life brings to the table.
If you're ready to make a new language part of your routine, Babel can help. Babel is a science-backed language learning app with lessons created by real people for real conversations. Babel doesn't rely on artificial intelligence to build its 10-minute lessons. Instead, there are handcrafted by more than 200 language experts focused on teaching phrases in vocabulary you'll actually need to communicate.
I've used Babel myself from trying to learn Spanish since I spent four years trying to learn it in high school and then I get in college. And I have to say I'm doing a lot better with Babel. I use it on the go when I'm traveling. It's super easy to do these 10-minute, 5-minute lessons. Here's a special limited time deal for our listeners. Right now, get up to 60% off your Babel subscription, but only for our listeners at babel.com slash swisher.
Get up to 60% off at babel.com slash swisher spelled B-A-B-B-E-L. Hi Dimitri, hi Chris, thanks for joining me. Thanks for having us. So I'm excited to talk to you both and you both have a background in cyber security. Let's start with Taiwan, which is the red hot center of things. Dimitri, let's start out with your new book, World on the Brain, Calamérica Can Be China and the Race for the 21st Century.
In the prologue, you described a scenario in which China invades Taiwan on November 13th, 2028. Thank you for that exact date. The US has to decide what to do next. I'm going to be honest. You sounded a little apocalyptic, but it's completely something that we can imagine. Explain the scenario you envision and why that date.
Let me first start with the fact that in December of 2021, I went public on then Twitter and said that was convinced that Putin was going to invade Ukraine before the end of that winter. I'm the first analyst to predict that. Unfortunately, I was right. The same reasons that convinced me that Putin was going to take Ukraine or attempt to take Ukraine are playing out in the Indo-Pacific.
You've got an authoritarian dictator that has surround himself with yes man that wants to get into the history books as a new Mao in Putin's case as a new Peter the Great that is making their countries great again tomorrow and other phrase. They're focused on the strategic implications, the geopolitical implications, the security implications of their country of expanding and taking these buffer states as they seem Ukraine and in case of Putin and Taiwan in the case of China.
I'm increasingly worried that we are on the path to a catastrophic war. I cannot underestimate how impactful this conflict would be. When you estimate the level of casualties that we would encounter, should we fight for in this war, it could exceed the daily casualties with China and World War II. Just unimaginable loss of life, infrastructure destruction and impact to the economy. Trillions of dollars will be wiped out literally within hours of that war.
So we have to do everything in our power to make sure that we don't fail like we failed with Ukraine, that we actually deter this conflict. Because even if we win it, it will be a complete disaster for the world. That was really the goal of this focus to sound the alarm and most importantly to focus on the solutions of how do we actually get the sun? Why this date? One of the things that years ago I was at an Aspen Security Conference in Admiral there who was in the area in the Pacific Fleet.
Utterly thought that China was the biggest danger we faced from a cybersecurity perspective from every, this was many years ago and I tended to agree with them. Talk about why you picked this, why November 13th, 20th, is just you're just making it up for a scenario or? No, I do think it's likely to, the window for invasion I think does open up in 2028.
You probably have heard a lot about the CIA Director Burns and others in the US government talking about how she has given the order to his military to get ready by 2027. That doesn't mean that the invasion takes place in 2027.
I actually think it's unlikely to take place in 2027 because they're going to be very busy with the new party congress to elect a chief for what is likely to be his fifth term in office and just because he's given the order for them to be ready doesn't mean that they actually will get there as we know government agencies don't necessarily work on the timeline. You want them to but also why does he want that to be the case in 2027?
It's because he's going to be in front of party congress and he wants to be able to tout the achievement that we are now ready to do this at a moment's notice. I think once he gets past that election, comments party election obviously, he will start thinking about his legacy. The problem with him is that just like Putin he's looking at his own mortality. He's going to be 79 in 2032 the end of that term.
Like our system they don't tend to elect their leaders since the 80s and he may not get another term after that. That 28-32 window is very dangerous. What else is happening in 28? You have a Taiwan election that can give you Kazus Belly depending on how it goes and January of that year with inauguration of a president and May.
You also have the Olympics in Los Angeles that summer which will be very distracting for the United States and of course you have our election where regardless of the other person will be president. Another person will be president not Joe Biden or Trump. You will have a new president coming in and a lame duck presidency most likely in November of that year that can be very distracting and as we know when lame duck presidency occur after elections people head for the door.
This start looking for jobs so the national security establishment just gets completely wiped out from a political appointee perspective. So it will be really skeleton administration distracted from the Olympics. A Taiwan situation that could get worse. That could give him an opportunity to go. It doesn't mean that it will happen in 28. It could happen in 29, 30, 31 but that's when you think the window opens. It will happen. You're feeling. Chris you thoughts on the scenario.
Do you agree with Demetri? We're on the brink of war with China and if Xi Jinping does invade Taiwan what role will cyber play? I'd love you to give an idea of what they've been doing up until this date or what they've been doing in recent years. There are single most important cyber adversaries. The pacing threat as the Pentagon and others have said for years now but didn't you leave out the sea state?
With April what's going on with the weather around Taiwan that would allow for the amphibious attack? Is that part of the calculus as well? No you should read the book Chris and I know you haven't gotten a copy yet but I actually think that the weather conditions do not play as big role as often said because this is not going to be beach invasion. This is not saving private Ryan Chinese edition. I spent a lot of time walking the terrain of Taiwan.
There's only a few ways that I think this can be done and the sea conditions in Taiwan are actually terrible almost all year round. It's basically impossible to do anything but large container ships so it's a very tough place to invade. So part of the military doctrine for the Chinese Communist Party is one way to one of fight and this is going back to Sun Su and all that but actually don't allow your adversary, your enemy to fight.
Part of what they've been doing with cyber for years now is winnowing their way into US critical infrastructure in the region as well as here in the US.
So what's known as operational preparation of the battlefield, putting themselves into a place where if they have to flip a switch they can but the point is when they know they're going to push go and I'm not as convinced as Dimitri I do think that regardless of whether there's been a political decision to invade they're absolutely working towards the ability to invade and part of that again is to ensure that they're in the right position.
So first prong of their cyber attack would be hitting defense industrial base, hitting military installations, communications, logistics all in the region and in the region I would include Honolulu. But Guam, Diego Garcia, Okinawa, all of the US military as well as other allies that are in the region take off their ability to project force. The second aspect of this is more consistent with a broader information operations approach of technical attack plus psychological impacts.
And so what they would do is hit US civilian critical infrastructure, water facilities, power, anything that we use on a daily basis, knock it off line so that us, not the military but the civilian population are distracted, are upset. And once you start getting into three, four, five, six days of not having power or water you get pretty upset with your political leaders.
I mean you all remember the summer of 2021 when Colonial Pipeline went down and in this area you could not get gas for about a week. Think about that at scale across more sectors of infrastructure. And so the point there is that while they're taking off our ability to project force, they're also undercutting our political will.
And if you think about down the street here on Capitol Hill, what would be going on down there, it kind of leads you to, it's chaos and are we really going to prosecute the war here? And if you combine that with a significant loss of life and a bunch of body bags coming home, I think this. And talk about the psychological warfare which you touched on, which has been going on forever. Right.
So we talk about cyber all the time and we talk about mis-dis-propaganda, the different kinds of information warfare. The Chinese have been investing in propaganda and information warfare for years. The Russians have been there really kind of in the 2016 election, developing the playbook on how to interfere politically, but the Chinese have been at it at a much more local level.
I mean, I'm joking here a little bit, but it kind of gives you a sense of the level they've been operating historically, but it's almost at the dog catcher level. They're in the communities where they have expats and others that have migrated and they really want to be able to control and influence their diaspora. And so they engage at the local and the community level.
Much more recently though, they've been elevating it up into DC and Congress, even using some of their influence and leverage back home on deals, business deals, permits, authorities to operate, and getting US and other businesses to come back and lobby. I won't say directly on their behalf, but indirectly on their behalf because if you want that deal, if you want that license, if you want that permit. You need to start thinking about getting some policy change in DC.
That's just kind of the obvious stuff. Then there's this other kind of sub-roso work that's going on where, again, they're copying the Russian playbook of permeating social media using fake personas, using pink slime websites. They're not very good at it though. They are missing kind of the connection culturally, but nonetheless, they are trying, they're practicing, they're getting reps on keyboard.
The director of national intelligence said in the 2022 midterm election review that the Chinese absolutely attempted to influence politics in that election. No question, and why wouldn't they? Right. Dimitri, you write, there are five reasons Taiwan matters to Xi Jinping, history, destiny, security, geography, and ego. Taiwan was traded or seeded or separated and belongs to China. They want it back. Which, by the way, is not true. Okay. They want it back, nonetheless. Ego is also clear.
He wants a big win for his legacy. He's clearly gotten radicalized over the years. He was sort of a capitalist and has moved somewhere else in that lexicon. But talk about the security implications and the geography. Tell me about maps. You have to look at the map of the region and when you look at it from the perspective of China, you actually appreciate how insecure they feel because they're basically as they look out at the world from their shores.
They're basically completely surrounded by US military bases and US partners. So all the way from the Korean Peninsula, South Korea, we have almost 30,000 American troops to the Japanese islands where we have American troops to Taiwan, which the view is an outpost of the United States to the Philippines where we once again have military bases. That entire first island chained with the Korean Peninsula is basically containing China today.
And if you're the Chinese Navy that wants to project power across both the Pacific and ultimately the world, you have to go through these choke points between the Japanese islands and Taiwan or between Taiwan and the Philippines that again fully controlled by the US Navy. If you want to be great power as they do, you can't allow that to happen.
And Taiwan is that anchor point that if they take Taiwan, they're going to be able to push the US out of the Western Pacific, push us all the way back to potentially Hawaii. It will change the entire dynamic of that region. So it's not only a security issue for them, but it's also a power projection issue where taking Taiwan will allow them to dominate Asia. We are 50% of the world's GDP, most of the world's supply chains, most of the growth.
And as I argue in the book, Taiwan leads to becoming a Hegemon in Asia and a Hegemon in Asia leads to becoming a Hegemon in the world. And that's why the United States should care about Taiwan. Yes, chips are important, but frankly it's insulting to the Taiwanese to reduce the chips and Taiwan has mattered to us long before chips were even the thing. So it's a strategic point of view.
Chinese aggression in South China Sea was the main focus of the first US-Japan Philippines trilateral meeting, talk about the South China Sea and what the importance of the South China Sea in the, which they call salami tactics, is that correct?
Salami's license where they're basically going in and they've been doing this for 20 plus years, taking these artificial reefs, these rocks in the South China Sea, building up artificial islands out of them that they would first say are not militarized and they
would put an air base on there, they would put a radar on there and they've been doing that all across South China Sea, where they now are the dominant power there, including in areas that are disputed, like with the Philippines in this place called Second Thomas
Shoal, where Taiwan is the future threat, potentially four or five years out, the Second Thomas Shoal incident is the current threat because you have the situation where the Philippines had grounded one of the old World War II ships on the Shoal and they have Philippine
Marines there that they tried to resupply regularly to sort of establish their presence and the Chinese are aggressively trying to prevent them, they've been shooting water cannons at them, injuring some of the people and this is potential for conflict because we have
a mutual defense treaty with the Philippines and in fact the United States has recently reaffirmed that it applies to the ship that's in South China Sea, so we might actually get into a conflict with China even over a show, very, very dangerous situation. Now unlikely it would get into full scale war like over Taiwan, you would hope that cooler heads would prevail but it's a very dangerous situation.
So Chris Prime Minister Kishida had some pretty strong words aimed at China, unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion is absolutely unacceptable wherever it may be but in general even as they were talking about building up defenses and alliances, all three reiterated that they want to maintain mutually strategic relationships with China, meet the lines of communication open, Biden has been talking about reducing dependency of course.
So what is the difference between de-risking and decoupling and what should the US be doing now because we have great reliance, you know, technology, goods, there's a very strong relationship between the countries. I think the one way to look at it is de-risking is one consulting company's term for it and decoupling is another consulting firms.
Okay. So for it, the way I see it though and de-risking is kind of the term that's very invoked in particular Europe is they look at diversifying supply chains out of China but de-risking is a, hey we've got an operation in China, we have to have this widget sourced from there but can we get alternative supply chains? So it's a China plus one model or China plus model. We're seeing a lot of that.
We're seeing a lot of companies that are moving elsewhere in- Just today Tim Cook was visiting Vietnam, I think I believe. Yes. So you have Vietnam, you know, they set up a number of factories in India as well. De-coupling is extracting out of China entirely. It's a much more aggressive shift. It's near-shoring, reshoring, friend-shoring, it's coming back. Mexico has seen the significant boom in the market. So, some Chinese companies are also thinking of locating there too.
You've listened to the same daily podcast from last year that I did. But yeah, a lot of firms, Chinese firms are coming and setting up in Monterey and it gives them the advantage of having that UNSCHA made in Mexico duty free advantage. So they're being very smart about it. They're diversifying elsewhere.
You may have also seen Microsoft cutting a deal with G24 in UAE and part of that deal, G24 is a Dubai-based AI company that had keyword, had relationships with the CCP and other Chinese entities. But as I understand it, part of that deal was G24 would have to sever relationships with the CCP for Microsoft to make their $1.5 billion investment. So you're seeing the China, not just the military risk and the invasion risk, but the financial and supply chain risk factors cascading across the world.
They're finally, it seems, catching on in areas of, well, in the EU. It has been very resistant, reluctant to get into the China conversation. This is something that I saw up close and personal.
In the last administration, when we were advocating on behalf of alternatives to Huawei for 5G telecommunications providers, and it's not a particularly compelling case when a US official comes into Europe and says you can't buy that thing even though it's cheap and available and they're going to give you 130 percent finance. They're going on going with Huawei and everything else. The reluctance to do so. Would they reluctantly get away from Russia oil too until they weren't, correct?
Well, absolutely. The difference, though, is that the financial interdependencies with Russia are significantly smaller. Right. Exactly. So, when you think about that the spring of 22, the number of companies that could just turn off an entire geography overnight. A lot of them did because Jeff Sonnenfeld and Yale had him on a list and they were very responsive to that list. A lot of companies were able to do that. You're not going to be able to do the same with China overnight.
No, no, not at all. Especially, I mean, the two tech companies are probably most exposed to be Apple and Tesla, right, correct. And he's got enough problems already. Dimitri, if China invaded Taiwan, the US didn't come to Taiwan's A. There are two major impacts, a major shift in geopolitical power structures in Asia and beyond, and global economic fallout of these two, which is worse for the US and the world. I guess they're both terrible.
But they're both terrible, but you could argue that we can get over the global depression that would be in, for sure, akin to what we experienced in the 1930s. Eventually, you get back to growth, but losing US preeminence in the world, that's something you can't get back. And the reality is that China is incredibly weak, right. We talk a lot about their population decline. They can go from 1.4 billion people today to about 550 million conservatively estimating by the end of the century.
That's a collapse of their population, right. The economic model is stagnating because of recent middle-income trap. Just so many problems, fundamental problems in the economy. But if they take Taiwan, if they're able to set the rules of the road in Asia, and they're going to be able to do that. I mean, I've had conversations with senior Japanese government officials and others who have told me that if China occupies Taiwan, that is going to change everything for them.
They're going to have a new share of the town that they're going to have to sing in large parts of their tune in many ways that you see states they're neighboring Russia, they're not part of NATO sending to Russia's tune because they have no choice, right. If you're in Central Asia, the United States is far away. You may not want to do what Putin wants, but you have no other alternatives.
And that's what's going to happen in Japan and Korea and Philippines, that entire region that is so vital to economic growth and arguably the US national security. So it's going to have huge ramifications. And then the other one, of course, is semiconductors. I'll get to those in a second. But is there any scenario which we wouldn't come to their aid? Oh, I think it's the best of 50-50 decision because I think whoever is president should this scenario come to pass, it's a very tough call, right.
When you start looking at the American lives, it will be lost, the economic impact. It's a hard call. Even though Biden has set on four occasions and he'll come to Taiwan's defense, I think if he were confronted with this, he would struggle. Add into that though the kitchen table issues, right? When prices start ticking up, Walmart and all that, I mean, the base is just going to fall apart.
It's going to be really hard to support this when things are as expensive, you know, just the daily goods that you need are doubling and tripling. And a quick story for you. We have a question coming up from Congressman Gallagher. So last year, I did a tabletop exercise for his committee, the China Committee, and the House on Wall Street with senior Wall Street executives participating. We looked at the economic impacts of a confrontation with China.
And literally one of the executives stood up in the room, looked at all the options that were presented in terms of what we could do to China, sort of similar to what we did with Russia with sanctions, export controls, assets, seizures, and the like. He said, all of this is like economic nuclear war. We can't do any of that without destroying our entire economy. Right. Well, in foreign direct investment, in China is down, in part because of the saber rattling.
However, investments that pre-existed are still staying. And companies are making moves right now on risk management to segment off those operations so they can certainly are. I know. They can withstand political and geopolitical turmoil. Right. Political pressure is what it is. No one is pulling out. No, no, because it's a huge economy. We'll be back in a minute. This message comes from Apple Card. Earn up to 3% daily cash back on every purchase every day.
Then grow it at 4.50% annual percentage yield when you open a savings account with Apple Card. Apple.co slash card calculator to see how much you can earn. Apple card subject to credit approval. Savings available to Apple Card owners subject to eligibility. Savings accounts provided by Goldman Sachs Bank USA. Member of FDIC, Terms Apply. Hi, everyone. I'm Brane Brown and this is Unlocking S. And this podcast will explore ideas, stories, experiences, research, books, films, music.
Anything that reflects the universal experiences of being human, from the bravest moments to our broken hearted moments. Some episodes will be conversations with the people who are teaching me, challenging me, confusing me, maybe ticking me off a little bit. And some days I'll just talk directly to you about what I'm learning and how it's changing the way I think and feel. The first episodes are out now.
We're going to do three or four part series every quarter, so about 12 to 15 episodes a year. Unlocking S will always drop on Wednesdays. And now you can find me wherever you normally listen to your podcasts. You can get new episodes as soon as they are published by following Unlocking S on your favorite podcast app. And as always, stay awkward, brave and kind. Hi, this is Scott Galewa, Professor of Marketing at NYU Stern School of Business and Host of the PropG Pod.
If you don't know me, the New York Times calls me the Howard Stern of Business, you're swisher, super friggin' insightful and Elon Musk, an insufferable num-school. I think we're going to make up. I think we're going to go somewhere and do ketamine together. Each week on my show, the PropG Pod, we bring you insights from blue flame thinkers, including my nemesis, Adam Grant, SuperSmart Guy. My nemesis because he's really good.
Or one of our favorite journalists, Farid Zikhariah, Farid's a total gangster. And not only that, we provide listeners with a market-driven episode every Monday. We answer our listeners' questions about Business, Big Tech and Career Pivots every Wednesday and get to listen to the sweet sound of George Hahn reading our newsletter every Saturday. That's right, the PropG Pod is in your feeds four times a week. I'm like AOL in the nine-use to resist his futile. Put your hand into a box of cereal.
Is it a tasty sugary snack? Nope, it's the dog! So I want to talk about cyber for a minute. We wrote the experts in the space, Chris, as the head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Administration and the Trump Administration. You were tasked with protecting Americans from Chinese hackers among other threats. We just talked about the general threat they posed to American infrastructure. You already discussed that.
But the US Cyber Safety Review Board recently released a report that eviscerated Microsoft's security culture and said the hack, which netted about 60,000 State Department emails, was preventable. Talk to us about the report and do you agree with it? Does anything surprise you? So I'm in an interesting spot. I'm kind of the unholy trinity of being a former Microsoft employee.
Former head of a US government agency that had significant engagement with Microsoft and now work for a competitor and at least in the security segment with Microsoft. So kind of wearing those three different hats. Is it a perfect person to answer this? It was almost like I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed. But then the more I read it and thought about it, I was like, no, I'm actually pretty mad. Because the national security implications. And look, Microsoft might not need the US government.
They have a very diverse global customer base. But the US government has put a lot of eggs in the Microsoft basket.
And if you see some of the decisions they've made for features and business at the expense of security, like making the conscious decision not to rotate keys because it created problems on the business side is a that we can't have that right now with everything that's going on with the fact that we know Russia, we know China, we know the most sophisticated actors, including cyber criminals are going after Microsoft because of the business.
Well, no, they're going after them because that's where everybody's gone. It's the willy-sutton equivalent, why do you rob banks? Because that's where the money is. Why do you go after the cloud providers? Because that's where the data is, that's where the access is. Putting a lot of demand and responsibility on these companies. And to see them not follow through in such stark relief, thanks to the work that Dimitri and the board did, it should be concerning to everyone.
So you did this work and you spent a lot of years trying to prevent or mitigate cyber attacks from China. But you don't spend as much detail these risks in the book. So is there a scenario that China does this without even launching a physical attack and talk a little bit about this review? Is that something you will worry about more? Yeah, so I do serve on a cyber safety review board. I was actually the vice chair of this review.
I'll let the report speak for itself, but I'll say this, the one concerning thing that was not noticed in all of the discussion around the Microsoft issues here is the fact that the actor that did this from China, that penetrated Microsoft networks and then access to emails of Gina Romando, Ambassador Nicholas Burns, who is our ambassador to China and a number of other national security officials. This actor has been known to us and has been tracked for over two decades.
In fact, this is the same actor that had Google back in 2010 and what I investigated back then called Operation Aurora, so this was really deja vu for me personally and is one of the most sophisticated actors, threat actors, operating out of China. So the fact that we've been dealing with this for 20 years, they've been hacking cloud providers and we're still facing this today is really concerning. But to answer your question, I've looked very heavily into this and put myself into China's shoes.
If I were to try to take Taiwan, are there any other options beyond invasion? I'm convinced that the answer is no. Having spent time in Taiwan, people don't appreciate how much that society has changed particularly in the last 20 years. How proud they are of being Taiwanese. Taiwanese first, not Chinese, how proud they are of their history. It's a little bit like Canada, right?
I believe firmly that it's not just about the CCP that if China was the beacon of freedom and democracy in the world, that the Taiwanese would want nothing to do with it. It's like Canada doesn't want to be the 54th state. Even though we think it's a great country, right? They've got their own thing going, they're very proud of it. And that's the case with Taiwan as well. Just for history, Taiwan has developed this independent identity for 75 years including a multi-party democracy.
You cite a poll from July 2023 that only about 7% of Taiwanese are interested in unification with mainland China and now in the future. So in that, that's your point. There is no constituency that wants to unify. Even if you look at those 7%, it's not clear how many of those people...
It's not clear how many of those people think that unification means that they will control China versus the other way around, which was the original Changkha-Shek's model of where we are China, but we control Beijing, right? So I don't think that China through propaganda, through coercion, can force these people, these very proud people to surrender outside of a military invasion. And that's the conclusion, by the way, that Putin came to with Ukraine.
He's tried for 20 years to influence that society, bribe. It did not work. He's created more opposition over the years, and that's why he ultimately invaded. And I think she's going to come to the same conclusion. So cyber is just one of the tools to soften it up. It's an influencing factor, not a determining factor. However, I will note that everyone's watching, in every government on the face of this earth, every military, every security service is watching this.
To see what they're going to do. And it's baking increasingly into military doctrine. So this is something that we're going to have to plan for and just about every G-Plan that we're going to come to. Well, I will, that's one of the questions coming. So let's just very quickly go over TikTok. I know it seems silly, but those infiltration fantasies are how she driving the concerns about TikTok and her proposed ban Senator Schumer.
Chuck Schumer is working on the House TikTok bill that would force Biden and Stuy Vest. Biden says he'll sign it. It has a lot of bipartisan support. Even if it passed tomorrow, the divestment period is currently six months. It could be extended a year. With an eye to the November elections, how important is it that Washington get this done? Why don't you start Dimitri and then I have a question for you, Chris?
Yeah, Kerry, as we've talked about many times now, the problem with TikTok is it should be treated as a media company, which is what it is. The best way to use your generated content, but they control what you see and crucially what you don't see, right? They are the filter. That's the reason why I think we need to focus on this is that this is an adversary-controlled media company that self-admittedly has access to half of the American population.
So Chris, TikTok, it feels like it's taking a lot of air out of the room. Do you think it's smoke-a-mirrors? Is it important? Are there bigger cybersecurity risks from China? I think it represents a lot of things. I think if you actually go and read the text of the bill, it's a foreign control bill. It refers back to other statute that identifies- Foreign ownership. China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and that list can be modified down the road.
If you are controlled by those countries, then you are then subject to the ensuing provisions of the statute. I think the easiest path forward is one around data privacy. We do not have a privacy law here in the United States, a federal privacy law. Now one was introduced a week or two ago that has- I said there again, well. Yeah, but look, I mean half a dozen or more privacy laws have been introduced every Congress for the last ten Congresses, two decades.
I don't know if that is going to- It's going to get across the finish line, but it's the privacy and who has access to our data, our personal information, that is probably the easiest way to address the overarching concern. The influence, the propaganda, the controlling, the actual information we see, that's a much, much different issue.
There are going to be first amendment issues, not just with that approach of the bill, but also if the companies do not go through the divestment procedures, then it is up to the app stores. And that means- It's going to be up to Apple and Google for Google Play. There's going to be litigation there. So I just see this bill, whether it goes through the Senate or it gets tacked on to a foreign aid bill that the House is considering. I see it just years of litigation.
But then the question is, what is China going to do? Because they're saying that they will rather shut it down and sell it, which sort of as a business guy makes your question, well, if this thing is worth tens of billions of dollars at a minimum, why would you destroy that versus try to make money on it? And the only answer is that because you want to use it as an influence platform. Right. And beyond the fact, by the way, that it doesn't require the uninstallation of the app from devices.
So if you got it, whatever we were making a ruling on under the law, it stays. You just can't get an update. And then with other platforms, you can- What's the download? That's right. It's not illegal for people to use it. It's going to be prohibited for the app stores to distribute it. That's right. And that's to advertise and tick-tock. Which was the original approach, by the way, under the Trump administration that you could not transact business with the platform.
And so it's a different approach. I think they've tested it, whether it's a bill of a tanger. They've looked at first amendment issues, Chairman Gallagher and his team are pretty confident. We'll see. I'm going to move you from tick-tock because everyone loves talking about tick-tock. But clearly, one of the bigger reasons China wants to control is economics. This is a bigger fish here. Taiwan produces more than 60% of the world's semiconductor chips and 90% of the most advanced ones.
They call it Taiwan's silicon shield. I'd like you each to talk about the importance of the chips in US strategy. We saw how chip production delays impacted whole industries during the pandemic. China also has been pumping money into the chip industry, doing what it always does engage in price dumping, hoping to gain market share and boost it. And the third thing is an AI. Obviously, chips are increasingly important.
Silicon Valley is spending trillions of dollars building new chip fabs and takes a long time. Biden administration announced a $5 billion investment in February. It's certainly not enough because Sam Alms trying to raise $7 trillion to raise the global semiconductor industry. Both of you, how do we become more independent from it and just give your overall thoughts on the importance of the chip here? I know you said it was talked about a lot, but it's very important. It is crucial.
Chips are called the new oil. I actually say in the book that's a guided view because there are alternative oil. There are no alternative to semiconductors. For the entire economy, the digital economy runs on semiconductors. AI, there would be no AI without advanced chips, right? Nvidia GPUs. They're powering chat GPT and all the advances that you're seeing in the last couple of years. So it is absolutely fundamental.
One of the things that gets misunderstood about chips is this focus on advanced chips and yes, they're important for you, I and other applications. But actually what I call the foundational chips or legacy chips are even more important. When you think about your phone, there are only three advanced chips. There's a CPU, the processor, memory, and the Qualcomm chip that connects you to the cell tower.
There's about 150 or 160 foundational chips that control the screen, the battery, the GPS, the accelerometer, everything that makes it a phone. What's happening right now is we've been able to successfully the administration implemented these export control policies to prevent China from buying equipment to produce advanced chips. The most part of it works, they have a few poll that haven't closed down yet, but China's doubling down on foundational, which is the majority of the market.
And if they corner that, they'll be able to control our entire economy because our weapons platforms, our microwaves, our cars, even AI, yes, you have the GPU there, but you need power to power that GPU that runs on foundational chips.
So everything depends on those foundational chips and China is right now trying to corner that market with subsidies and with price dumping through over capacity, which is a playbook that we've seen in the seal industry, in the solar industry, now playing out in electric vehicles and batteries. It's a playbook that has worked 100% of the time for them, historically. And they're trying to do this again. Chris? Look, I think even with foundational chips, we have challenges here.
To the point about the Chips and Science Act, when Speaker Pelosi last term went over to Taiwan, she was having conversations about the Chips Act and said, yeah, nice start. You missed a zero or two at the end. We're not putting enough into this. And then when we do, and the money starts hitting accounts, it takes much, much longer to break ground because of regulations because we don't have the people. We don't have the technology, environmental assessments and impact assessments.
Those things are slowing down a lot of, I think the progress we want to make here, but we can change all that, but we have the follow-through. So is there any way for the US to build its chip business? It's a decades-long process, correct? Well, we're building it and TSMC is going to open up actually a factory in Arizona next year. They're getting money from the Chips Act and tells building in fact, you're in Ohio. But that's really just stemming the flow.
If the Chips Act works in the most optimistic scenario, we will go from about 12% of the world's chip speed produced in the US to 20%. We will not reduce, meaningfully, our alliance on Taiwan for the foreseeable future for the foreseeable decades. Taiwan will be the place that manufactures the most amount of chips.
So going back to the idea of de-risking in 2022, the White House and Commerce Department announced export control measures to prevent China from importing advanced chips to be used in AI training. They want to prevent anyone with a green card or American passport from working on Chinese semiconductor industry and advanced chip manufacturing. And the Biden administration, C.M. and TEN, on continuing the trade war that Trump started with China.
Their signs are going to put up tariffs, block electric cars, chip energy. Talk about that. Each of you talk about that idea of us attempting to put sand in the gears, essentially. Well, we absolutely can do it. We're doing a little bit of it, not nearly enough.
But one of the dirty little secrets about the semiconductor manufacturing industry is that the equipment that you need, the most sophisticated equipment, really man, has ever built to produce these chips that are three nanometers in terms of distance between the transistors. It's all produced in three countries. ASML is a company that a lot of people hear about in Netherlands. But there are also three major companies in the U.S. and a couple in Japan.
Those three countries coming together, all allies, and Japan particularly very concerned about China and Taiwan, can stop the flow of that equipment into China and literally prevent China from building any more fabs than they already have. And in fact, if they stopped maintaining the existing equipment, you could even see shut downs of existing fabs in China. So this is absolutely within our control. We're unwilling to do that because of the overall relationship with China.
They would obviously view that as very negative. But also because the supply chain for chips is very, very tight and there would be real economic downturns from shutting down their chip production. Yeah, but also the timeline you just mentioned. I mean, it would take a dozen plus years to get a lot of this stuff off the ground. And you look at the larger multinationals in the U.S. to vertically integrate and make those investments.
I mean, it is hundreds of billions, if not as same-album as what it trillions of dollars. And it's not a tomorrow thing. It's not an X-quarter thing. As a long-term strategic investment, I think that's where our leadership, regardless of political party, has to figure out which narrow lane do we want to take. And if it's for national security applications, get back to a trusted foundry's model, which didn't work. But do we want to reinvest?
And we actually have to follow through with the right investments, which we have not done to date. Yeah, so essentially we're fucked. Okay. So speaking of which, you did predict Putin would invade Ukraine. After a week we get a question from an outside expert. This week, it's Wisconsin Representative Mike Alligor, outgoing representative. He's getting out of Dodge. Who is the chair of the China Committee?
I'm going to read it, Mike asks, my big question for you, besides who is your favorite member of Congress, is as the Chinese Communist Party looks at Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine. What lessons is it learning in general? And in the cyber-german in particular, each of you answer him very quickly. What are they learning? You know, that's a really hard question to answer because you could look at this and say they're learning that invading in other countries is very difficult. It could go wrong.
I had a conversation with a senior Pentagon official at the very beginning of the war and I asked that very question to them and they said, what they're learning is that America will not fight a nuclear power. Right? So you could learn both things that maybe this is too tough to do, but also maybe that the Americans will not commit their troops to fight for another country.
And in fact, what they're seeing right now in U.S. Congress with the Ukraine aid getting tied up and by the way, Taiwan's aid isn't that package as well. And they may be realizing that America would be an unreliable ally to Taiwan, which is by the way the propaganda that pushing Taiwan, which is very effective. Trying to tell the Taiwanese America will not come to your aid. You're going to be on your own. The best thing for you is to appease us, is to try to get closer to us.
On the cyber front, there's almost an Eastern philosophy approach here that accept your mortality. And once you kind of accept that you're going to get hit, you make a different set of decisions. And it's more about resilience and recovery. And that's one thing that I think throughout this invasion that the Ukrainians have shown is that they know the Russians are coming. They know they're going to get in. They know they're going to unleash a malware and bring some stuff down.
So what's their response and recovery strategy and how quickly can they get back up those critical processes? The Ukrainians have been incredibly resilient. Now they have had US government support, cyber command and others. They have also had significant private sector support. So it does show that there's a coalition of the good guys behind this that has always be ready to go and jump into the trenches when needed. And Chris and his company were one of those actually.
Okay. So last couple of questions. In your book, I'd like to relay it out your recipe for avoiding a devastating war. You said the US should be closely re-evaluating our entanglements in Europe, the Middle East, and America asking how the impact our ability to contain or deter China or does it distract us. JD Vance recently penned an op-ed where he pushed a similar line essentially saying the war in Ukraine is diminishing our ability to contain China. But I'm going to push back.
How is it possible to reduce US policy in these conflicts to a China lens? Yeah. So I'm not an isolationist. I believe that we need to support Ukraine. I don't believe that we need to withdraw from everyone in the world and only focus on China. But I do believe that China needs to be a top priority. And as we allocate our limited resources, we should be asking what is going to be the impact of deterring this or only devastating conflict if it were to occur in the Taiwanese straight.
And there are certain things about Ukraine that I think are helpful in creating more deterrence for China. One of the things it has done is woken us up to the inadequacies of our defense industrial base and how we need to increase our production. That's been great. It's also depleted our air defense stocks and this war will be as much about air defenses, it will be about naval power and anti-ship missiles because China has the world's largest rocket and missile forces.
So we need to ramp up massively that production and we need to be asking hard questions of do we have enough in the region? Do we have enough in Taiwan to make sure that it is absolutely resource allocation issue. And what does that mean for Ukraine? Well, I think there is a lot that we can do for Ukraine, for example, providing them with fighter jets, providing them with artillery, providing them with ground force capabilities armored vehicles and tanks. That's all fine.
We don't need any of that really in Taiwan to the extent that you are like to have a conflict over Taiwan. But in a few areas, air defense and anti-ship missiles, we got to be much more thoughtful and ask questions. Do we have enough in our own inventory? So taking a look more for kind of silver linings here with the potential conflict with China, I'm looking south.
I'm looking to, as all these companies, de-risk, decouple whatever you want to call it and they start coming back this way, you look south into Latin America. There's an incredible amount of natural resources, land to expand. There's an insane amount of technical talent. Weets and a one are making a lot of hires in Latin America because the technical talent is so good.
So why not think more about economic development in Latin America to pull some of those dependencies that we have a China out, move them south? At the same time, we can address perhaps some of the pull factors that are driving a lot of the immigration issues. So I think there's a much bigger two to three for one play in Latin America that we just need to have a broader conversation about. So solving immigration through decoupling from high level? That could be a byproduct at least.
All right, last question, obviously the world is watching what happens in November election. How and what way do you think a Trump presidency would impact the relationship with China or allies, the Indo-Pacific region? What are your biggest concerns about that, about the election right now? Well, this is a question that I get asked often, both in Asia and in Europe as what is Trump going to do if he gets elected. That's ultimately a noble. I'm not sure he knows what he would do. He's busy today.
But the reality is that- Sleep in and court. You have this. They had to. Come on. The reality is that you have actually the Trump administration that needs to get credit for getting China right in terms of the threat and really changing the whole conversation in this town and creating bipartisan consensus that we need to confront China. So that's a positive. The negative, I would say, is this tendency to try to pull out of alliances, NATO and the like.
But there's questions about whether he even cares about Taiwan or whether he would come to their defense or not. Would he strike trade wars with Japan and other allies that we really need to deter China? So I would say it's a big question which way he's going to lean in. Is he going to be strong on China but also build alliances or is he going to talk tough on China but also push everyone else away? What about the Biden, a future Biden administration?
Well, Biden and large part has continued the China policies of the Trump administration. But they're also flirting with us and doing engaged. Do we not engage? You know, Jake Sullivan talks about small yard high fence. It's not clear how large that yard really is because if you're going to deter China, you need to do what I call in the book as unidirectional entanglement.
You need to not decouple because then you lose all leverage but you make sure that they're more dependent on us than we are dependent on them. And that's in areas of chips, in AI, in energy, in critical minerals. The whole slew of things that we're dealing with in this competition. And right now it's really mixed bag and we're not doing enough in a lot of these areas to disentangle ourselves but also make sure they're more dependent on us. All right. It's a big picture, 24 election.
Kind of looking at three main areas of concern. First is going back to 2016, it's the technical attacks on election infrastructure, on systems, on the counting, the certification process. The news is there, consistent with prior assessments, the national intelligence folks say that they're not aware of any adversary that's got the capability and certainly hasn't demonstrated much of the intent to get in there and change a vote, disrupt counting or certification.
But you're still, I think, we're going to see both foreign and what's going to be different this year. I think we're going to see domestic actors trying to poke prod pry kind of consistent with the coffee county Georgia theft of election systems and software. Because they're just more ideologically trying to make a point, not necessarily to change the outcome but continue to undermine our faith in the public institutions.
Second is disinfo and whatever that term even means these days, you're going to see much more on the influence shaping and that's going to be to kind of change perceptions, change outcomes and actions. And that's again, that's going to be foreign and that's going to be domestic. We're going to see a lot more of these groups that are on the fringe that are trying to again undercut our confidence. And this is a continuation of the big lie from 2020.
And then third, which is somewhat related, but it's physical threats against election workers. And when I talk to the national security folks and I talk to state and local election officials, the number one thing they're worried about are threats to election officials. We're talking about doxing public information out on the internet, swatting. So calling 911 saying, hey, I shot my kids or my wife. You need to come and stop this and swat teams roll up.
So the number one risk really, I think, is physical against election officials and they are retiring in mass and there's going to be kind of a knock on effect here of not enough poll workers, not enough election officials. That's going to have impacts on our opportunity to participate in the process, which is a bit of the point. So the one thing I'll add here is on AI. I don't see AI being a huge impact on the 24 election.
I think it's going to be a lot of noise, a lot more like the robo calling. However, when somebody figures out how to take the Cambridge analytic process and then drop AI on top of it where you can do super precise micro targeting for influence purposes and build that kind of overarching appearance of consensus. And if you do it for ill, that's I think where AI comes to town. And so we're, that's probably a 26 or 28 concern. Oh, good. I'm sorry about that later on. All right.
Dimitri, in your prologue scenario, you say that in November, 2028, the president-elect has set up a transition headquarters in Madison with Conson. Care to tell us who in your mind I, that person is? No comment. Who is that? Who knows? Well, you do, apparently. So. Look, I do think that we're overdue for a candidate from the Midwest. The Midwest. What about you, Chris? What? Commenting on his book? Commenting on your candidate for 2020.
Which president would you like to see there if this is the conflict coming? Oh, Dwayne Johnson, I don't know. I mean, you know, it's kind of like idiocracy at this point. Right. It's my, it can actually go up, get up there and toss and have. Think of someone who could possibly handle it and you have to answer that too. I, you know, Mike's, Mike's a friend. Mike, in addition to the select committee on CCP, was also the chairman of the president.
This is Mike Gallagher. The Cyber Space Salaire Commission in the last administration. So I've worked with, with Gallagher for this. Formerly in two served in Iraq. Good guy. Got to keep my Gallagher. That's who they're talking about. And actually a highly competent person, 100%. Thank you both. I really appreciate this has been incredibly hefty. On with Cara Swisher is produced by Christian Castor Rocell, Cateri Yokem, Megan Bernie, and Shina Ozaki. Thank you all.
Thanks to Andrea Lopez-Gruzado, Kate Gallagher, and Mary Mathis. Our engineers are Fernando Aruda and Rick Juan, and our theme music is by Tracademics. If you're already following the show, you get a ticket to the South China Sea. If not, we'll see you on TikTok. Go wherever you listen to podcasts, search for on with Cara Swisher and hit follow. Thanks for listening to on with Cara Swisher from New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network, and us. We'll be back on Monday with more.
Apple Card is the perfect cashback rewards credit card. You earn up to 3% daily cash on every purchase every day. That's 3% on your favorite products at Apple, 2% on all other Apple Card with Apple Pay purchases, and 1% on anything you buy with your titanium Apple Card or virtual card number. And apple.co-slashcard-calculator to see how much you can earn. Apple Card issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Salt Lake City Branch, subject to credit approval in terms of supply.