Supply Chain Countermeasures: The Industry Chess Game Behind the Dichlorodihydrosilane Investigation

While Japan is still waiting to use photolithography masks to exert pressure, China has already taken the lead. On January 7th, the Ministry of Commerce announced an anti-dumping investigation into imported dichlorosilane (DCS) from Japan. Behind this seemingly low-key announcement lies a deep restructuring of the chip manufacturing industry chain.

The “Invisible Killer” in the Electronic Materials Industry

Dichlorosilane may be unfamiliar, but it is indispensable in chip manufacturing. Whether for logic chips or memory chips, thin film deposition processes require it. To some extent, it is the “blood” of the entire chip manufacturing industry chain.

Japanese companies such as Shin-Etsu Chemical and Mitsubishi Chemical continue to dump products into China, not just for profit, but also to hinder China’s domestic substitution process in electronic materials. Data submitted by the applicant, Tangshan Sanfu Electronic Materials, shows that from 2022 to 2024, Japanese firms increased exports while aggressively lowering prices, with a cumulative price decline of 31%. The logic behind this strategy is clear: use price wars to crush emerging domestic enterprises, and once the market structure stabilizes, raise prices again.

From Passive to Active Response

In the past, we often responded to trade conflicts with a “reactive” approach. This time, it’s different. Before Japan’s “trump card” in photolithography masks was even played, China launched an anti-dumping investigation—an instrument within the framework of international trade rules. This is not an emotional retaliation but a precise application of industrial policy.

Even more interesting is the timing—shortly after the policy message about export controls on dual-use items to Japan, an anti-dumping case against dichlorosilane was announced. This rhythm sends a signal: the vulnerabilities in the supply chain are two-way.

The Reality of Mutual Constraints in the Industry Chain

A report from Nomura Research Institute may illustrate the seriousness of the issue. If China implements export bans on critical raw materials like rare earths, Japan’s economy could shrink by approximately 660 billion yen (over 30 billion RMB) within just three months. This is not merely trade friction but a mutual restraint on the lifeblood of industries.

Japanese companies are now facing the dilemma of “dual binding” in the supply chain—when you use technology to hold others hostage, they can also pressure you with raw materials and markets. The path toward domestic production of electronic materials is already challenging, and Japan’s low-price dumping policies further complicate matters. However, government intervention not only protects the growth space of domestic industries but also constrains dishonest behaviors.

Rational Response Within the Rule Framework

Some voices worry that this is an “irrational” approach, but in fact, it is quite the opposite. The entire investigation process is based on domestic industry applications, strictly following WTO rules, with procedures compliant and legal. The truly irrational act would be attempting to achieve commercial bullying through technological monopoly.

When the game table is turned over, new rules of the game begin to take shape. This countermeasure is not just for the chip industry but also sends a signal to the global market: if you want to profit from the Chinese market while trying to leverage technology and supply chains to hinder China’s industrial upgrade, you will have to settle the accounts in the end.